Nota Bene

New Hydraulic Fracturing Chemical Disclosure Requirements Drawing Controversy

2012-02-07T09:08:00.001-08:00

The Houston Chronicle is reporting that newly proposed rules by The Bureau of Land Management (BLM) that would require those who drill on federal public lands to disclose hydraulic fracturing chemicals that they use is drawing heavy criticism by the oil and gas industry. Hydraulic fracturing or "fracking" is a method of extracting natural gas or oil from deep shale formations by the injection of a liquid substance (which usually includes chemicals) at high pressure. The new rules would allow a trade-secret exemption if companies can demonstrate that information is protected by state or federal regulations.

The ONEAR Mystery

2012-02-04T13:24:00.001-08:00

One of the things I still don't understand about the search syntax on Lexis Advance is: Why include the ONEAR/n Connector? Wait . . . You don't know about the ONEAR Connector?! Well, I'm not surprised, because no else seems to know about it either (including most employees of LexisNexis)!

First, of all, every person I've mentioned this Connector to has reacted the same way: "ONEAR? What's that mean? That's a dumb name!"

Second, it's actually a redundant Connector. According to the list on the Connectors tab of the Search Tips form page in Lexis Advance, the ONEAR connector (which is the last Connector listed) should be used when you want to "Include words where the first word precedes the second by not more than 'n' words". Hmm . . . Why does that sound familiar? . . . Oh, yeah. Because the fifth Connector listed is the PRE/n Connector, and its stated function is to "Include words where the first word precedes the second by not more than 'n' words"!

Take your time. Go ahead and read those two descriptions again. I'll wait. Your eyes are not playing tricks on you. They are the exact same description!

So here's my question: Why add ONEAR, a Connector that was not included in the Beta version and is not available through lexis.com, when you're going back and adding PRE/n, a Connector that lexis.com users are already comfortable with and that does the exact same thing?!

Attempting to Solve the Mystery

Back in June 2011, when I was preparing an initial critique of what was then called Lexis Advance for Law Schools BETA, I spent some time investigating the LexisNexis Marketing assertion that they had "moved to the new web standard set of Boolean connectors". Considering no other legal search engine relied upon the NEAR Connector (which is functionally identical to the trusty, old W/n Connector), I sought to identify where this new Connector had come from.

My research at that time led me to a company called Exalead. Exalead is "a global software provider in the enterprise and Web search markets, and the maker of . . . the industry's top platform for Search-Based Applications (SBAs)." A description of Exalead's main platform sounds remarkably similar to the "innovations" of Lexis Advance, and they utilize a small set of simple Connectors, including the NEAR Connector. But, as far as I can tell, they do not use the ONEAR Connector.

Now, it appears the solution might be much simpler than that. LexisNexis may be using an SBA as part of Lexis Advance, but they also may just be utilizing a relatively new programming language called FAST Query Language (or FQL). Developed for Microsoft FAST Search Server 2010 for SharePoint, "FQL is a query language providing advanced query capabilities against textual content". FQL is relatively simple to use, allows dynamic manipulation of content, and, most importantly (for my investigation), it utilizes the ONEAR Connector.

Mystery solved. Or is it? Considering all that FQL apparently can do, if LexisNexis is using it for the development of Lexis Advance, why can't we have the capitalization and pluralization commands that lexis.com allows? I guess that's the real mystery.

Sharia Incorporated

2012-01-31T17:05:00.000-08:00

One of the newest additions to the O'Quinn Law Library is a very informative work entitled Sharia Incorporated: A Comparative Overview of the Legal Systems of Twelve Muslim Countries in Past and Present. Edited by Jan Michiel Otto, Professor of Law and Governance in Developing Countries at Leiden University and Director of the Van Vollenhoven Institute for Law, Governance, and Development, this book examines how sharia law has been incorporated into the national legal systems of twelve Muslim nations.

Outside of an introductory chapter that establishes the groundwork for the analyses to follow and a final chapter that offers some preliminary conclusions, each chapter, written by scholars from around the world, focuses on one Muslim nation. The chapter provides a historical overview of the development of that nation's legal system before examining how sharia law manifests itself in various legal contexts, such as constitutional law, criminal law, family law, commercial law, and international treaty and human rights obligations. Each chapter also includes a respectable bibliography. In addition, the book provides a few tables that compare the twelve nations and their legal systems on specific issues as well as a very helpful glossary that provides definitions for many relevant (transliterated) Arabic words.

Although it is a comparative text at heart, it's value as a resource is immense. Want a quick glance at the legal system in Saudi Arabia? This book is for you. Want quick information on inheritance rights in Turkey? This book's for you. Want to get a sense of how Pakistan and Morroco compare on the recognition of human rights? This book's for you. Just want to get a better understanding of what exactly "sharia law" is anyway? This book's for you.

Unfortunately, this work was completed and published in 2010, so it does not take into account the revolutionary events of the Arab Spring. Still, it contains a mountain of information in easy-to-digest chunks. It's definitely worth a look.

3 Quick Tips

2012-01-27T10:29:00.000-08:00

If you don’t know how to cite something and the Bluebook doesn’t seem to provide an answer (which it doesn’t always do) a good resource is using Westlaw or Lexis’ journal database. Search the journal databases for the item you are having trouble citing to and see how someone else cited it. While this is not fool-proof, after all the Bluebook changes over the years, this is a good way to get started, and perhaps the examples provided will make those in the Bluebook make more sense.

As a law student I recall being told that once I found a “golden case,” a case very nearly right on point, that other relevant cases would flow from that one. When looking for books, rather than cases, the library’s catalog can help find other books on your topic. When your catalog search has yielded a gem; a book that is right on point, don’t stop. Go ahead and click on the item’s title which will take you to a screen that provides additional information, including a heading of “Subject Hdng” which stands for Subject Heading. Click one of the subjects which are covered by this book, and you be taken to a screen indicating other items that share this subject heading. By using the subject heading feature you can save yourself the time and effort when looking for similar items.

There is one song that all law librarians sing, the title is “Use Secondary Sources,” and the chorus is, “they make your life easier.” I am here to join the chorus and let you know that librarians are not the only ones singing this tune. I recently met with a group of attorneys, not associates, real partners, who echoed the refrain. Secondary sources were written by people who know what they are doing, who have done it a million times before, and are bestowing their knowledge on you. Don't try to re-invent the wheel, its easier to use one that has already been invented.

The Main Library Can Help -- JSTOR

2012-01-24T10:06:00.000-08:00

When you have exhausted the Lexis and Westlaw databases, but still can’t find a helpful article try JSTOR. JSTOR has law review articles, but it has so much more. If you are doing inter-disciplinary research and need something on Economics, History, Political Science, or something else non-law, you should try JSTOR.

JSTOR is about scholarly journals in a variety of academic disciplines. You won’t find Time, Newsweek, or the Economist there. I counted 54 subjects covered. Some subjects have only one journal in their collection while others have hundreds, the total number of journals is over 1,400. JSTOR’s stock and trade are historic journals; they will have entire runs of a particular journal from the first issue published in the 19^th century to more recent, but not current, issues.

JSTOR’s is a database of “historic” journals with very limited current (meaning the current year) content. This is a result of JSTOR’s “moving wall”. The idea of the “moving wall” is that publishers provide content to the site from their earliest issue to issues 3-5 years from their current issue. For example a current journal with a moving wall of 3 years may have all of its issues available from its first in 1910 up to issues published in 2008. In 2012 they will make available issues from 2009, and so on updating each year, but never making available the most recent three years. Starting in 2011 JSTOR began the process of phasing in current journals and have loaded approximately 150 of them.

The multi-disciplinary aspect of JSTOR is it’s great strength. Its holdings in fields such as History, Law, and Political Science make it an attractive database for providing background and context to scholarly articles in the legal field. If you can get past the fact that it does not contain the most up-to-date material and focus on its historic coverage (often back to the first issue of a journal) you will come to appreciate its value.

Legal Language Explorer

2012-01-22T15:40:00.000-08:00

Michigan State University School of Law and Emory University School of Law have teamed up with the Computational Legal Studies Blog to host the Legal Language Explorer. This database, especially for law and language enthusiasts, allows users to search and graph the history of phrases used in the decisions of the United States Supreme Court over time. For instance, you could use this tool to view a graphical representation of the Supreme Court’s usage of phrases such as “right to privacy” or “intermediate scrutiny.”

Currently, it will allow users to input phrases of up to 4 words long. However, multiple phrases can be shown on the graph simultaneously. The default search, for example, is “interstate commerce, railroad, deed,” which shows the usage of all three phrases over time. The database contains Supreme Court decisions from 1791 to 2005, but they hope to expand it to include decisions from other courts such as the U.S. Courts of Appeals.

The developers have written a paper about the database and created a helpful tutorial.

Federal Government Releases New Apps

2012-01-19T08:04:00.000-08:00

Yesterday the Library of Congress and the Government Printing Office announced a new iPad app that provides access to the daily edition of the Congressional Record for free. The app will allow users to keep up to date about the daily happenings on the floor of the Senate and U.S. House of Representatives as well as access historical issues of the publication back to 1995. Users can browse the daily editions or search within a particular issue. The app also allows you to save files in PDF format or share files via email.

This is actually the second app created with GPO content in the last few months, as GPO appears to be making plans to release more apps. In November 2011, the office announced its first app, the Mobile Member Guide, which provides information about members of the 112th Congress including a pictorial directory and short profiles. Users can browse by last name, state, chamber, or party, or they can search by first and last name. This free app is available on iOS, Android, and Blackberry devices.

More information about the Congressional Record App can be found in the press release issued by the Library of Congress. For more information about the Mobile Member Guide App, visit the GPO Mobile website.

Law Library Brown Bag Series

2012-01-12T13:16:00.000-08:00

Each semester the law library presents a series of presentations on legal research topics. These presentations are held at 12 noon Tuesdays and Wednesdays. During the 2012 Spring Semester, we will be offering the following sessions:

1. Researching Texas Administrative Law
Tuesday, 2/7, Wednesday, 2/8, 12:00-12:45 P.M.
Matt Mantel, Reference and Research Librarian

2. Researching Foreign and International Law
Tuesday, 2/14, Wednesday, 2/15, 12:00-12:45 P.M.
Dan Baker, International and Foreign Law Librarian

3. Texas Legislative History Research
Tuesday, 2/21, Wednesday, 2/22, 12:00-12:45 P.M.
Matt Mantel, Reference and Research Librarian

4. Researching Oil & Gas Law
Tuesday, 2/28, Wednesday, 2/29, 12:00-12:45 P.M.
Chris Dykes, Reference and Research Librarian

5. Effective Use of WestlawNext and Lexis Advance
Tuesday, 3/6, Wednesday, 3/7, 12:00-12:45 P.M.
Emily Lawson, Reference and Research Librarian

Session descriptions and room location will be posted soon on the law library's website.

Courts and Terrorism: Nine Nations Balance Rights and Security

2012-01-10T09:26:00.000-08:00

Cambridge University Press has published Courts and Terrorism: Nine Nations Balance Rights and Security (Edited by Mary L. Vocansek and John F. Stack, Jr.), which focuses on weighing the rights of individuals against the prevention of terrorist attacks. The first three essays, after the introduction, focus on this important issue from the U.S. standpoint with the first essay investigating how the U.S. Supreme Court has ruled on cases where national emergencies have been handled at the expense of individual liberties. Protecting state secrets and the rights of detainees labeled "enemy combatants" are also discussed in the next two essays respectively. The remaining chapters focus on how the struggle between national security and protecting individual liberties is dealt with outside of the United States including the approaches taken by Australia, Colombia, European Court of Human Rights, Great Britain, Israel, Italy, and Spain. This title is now on the new titles shelf in the law libra ry.

A Second Look: Lexis Advance Revisited (Part 2)

2012-01-07T09:40:00.001-08:00

I am re-examining Lexis Advance in light of its latest release to see how many of my concerns have been addressed. In Part 1 of this second look, I applauded LexisNexis for some of the changes they have made to Lexis Advance. In this continuation, I will address a few other changes I would still like to see and issue a call to action.

In Part 2 of my original critique of Lexis Advance for Law Schools BETA, I complained that many of the features and tools that make lexis.com a great tool for legal researchers were not available in the Beta version of Lexis Advance. Unfortunately, on this front, nothing has changed yet.

However, all is not lost. Lexis Advance does not currently allow for pre-search source selection, but I strongly believe that this will change. Sure, it provides those three pre-search filters that are surprisingly clunky and unwieldy, but even the newest legal researcher would like to be able to search in a specific source when they know that is where the document they need resides -- and sometimes, even the combination of pre- and post-search filters won't get you there. For example, let's say you're looking for a specific law review article you've seen before, and you can't remember the title or author, but you think you remember which law review published the article. You can use the pre-search filters to limit the search to Analytical Materials and then use the Content Type post-search filter to limit the results to just Law Reviews and Journals. Can you limit it further? Well, if you remembered in which state the law review was published, you could use the Jurisdiction filter to further limit the results, but sooner or later, your only choice will be to rely on the Source filter. Oh, but there's a problem with that: The Source filter only lists the titles of the law reviews with the 20 largest numbers of articles in your results set. So, if the law review you need is number 21 (or worse), you're out luck! Your only option will then be to scan the entire results list for articles from that law review!!

Here's another example of how unwieldy the filters can be. Let's say you need a case from the US District Court for the Western District of New York. The pre-search filters will allow you to narrow the search to Federal, but it doesn't let you limit it to just federal district courts, let alone the WDNY court specifically. So you run your search, and retrieve thousands (if not millions) of results. "No problem," you think (just as LexisNexis hopes you will), "I'll use the post-search filter labeled Court." Perusing the list of "Courts", you don't see individual federal district courts listed, but you do see District Court (although you may have had to click the More link to get the full list). Yes, that will reduce the number of cases in your results list, but the new results list doesn't give you any information regarding which cases are in which district courts, which, of course, means you'll have to click into each case to determine its issuing court (and, thereby, incur a separate charge for each one). At this point (or instead of using the Court filter, if possible), you could use the Source filter and select 2nd Circuit - US District Court Cases, but, again, the individual district courts are not identified on the results list. Counter-intuitively (at least to me), the way to get to just the WDNY decisions is to use the Court filter but select 2nd Circuit; then, the Court filter will allow you to further limit the results to New York Western District Court.

Accordingly, it's difficult to believe that LexisNexis would bend to such minor complaints as the available Connectors or universal characters without working on getting pre-search source selection into the product. For similar reasons, I have to believe that segment searching capabilities are on the horizon as well. Otherwise, why would they make the W/SEG Connector available in Lexis Advance?

Unfortunately, despite all my hopes, I currently do not have the same optimism that the old Commands will receive the same treatment. Since Lexis Advance was first announced, every person I have spoken with about this issue has consistently informed me that there are no plans to include Commands or their equivalents (i.e., ATLn or some other frequency capability, CAPS/ALLCAPS/NOCAPS or some kind of forced capitalization commands, and PLUR/SING, or any kind of forced pluralization control) in Lexis Advance. In my opinion, this demonstrates that the people driving the development of this product are not the people at LexisNexis who actually deal with the customers.

So let's make them.

A Call to Action

In the past, I have also complained about the syntactical problems associated with the Lexis Advance search box and its Word Wheel (see Unnecessary Change #3 in Part 2 of my original critique and Part 3 of my original critique), as well as the abhorrent and deplorable decision to alter the pricing paradigm (see Part 3 of my original critique). These issues remain, and I have little hope that LexisNexis will correct these flaws.

And yet, I am hopeful. Clearly, LexisNexis is listening. Although they made a huge mistake unleashing Lexis Advance before it was ready (considering it's still not where it needs to be), it is obvious that LexisNexis is paying attention. How else can you explain the complete flip-flop on the Connectors issue? And, not to toot my own horn, but I know of no one else who would have even noticed the change in universal characters let alone found it sufficiently important to complain about, and yet LexisNexis did make that seemingly insignificant change.

And so I have hope. And you should too. But to turn that "hope" into "change", you have to let LexisNexis know. You have to tell them that you don't like the new pricing scheme. You have to tell them you want to be able to limit your search to specific sources or to specific segments. You have to tell them you want a term frequency tool.

And you have to tell everyone. Tell your LexisNexis reps, all of them. Tell LexisNexis Customer Support (call either 1-800-543-6862 or 1-800-45-LEXIS, either one's fine); call them up if for no other reason than to give them your feedback on Lexis Advance (tell 'em Dan says Hi!). Send letters to the corporate offices. Write blogs; send tweets; post comments to their Facebook page (https://www.facebook.com/LexisCommunities)! And do it repeatedly!! The more significant the change demanded, the more significant the number and quality of the demands required to effect that change. Sure, they may change the Connectors available because a blogger and a couple of law library directors complained about it, but that's not enough to change the pricing; that's not enough to have them rewrite the search syntax; that's not enough to force them to make Lexis Advance at least as good as lexis.com.

We are the consumers. This is our chance. If you are that one person who is not a LexisNexis employee and yet thinks Lexis Advance is the bee's knees as it currently is, then let them know that as well. But if you're like me and don't want to be forced into the clutches of Westlaw by a deficient product, then you need to let LexisNexis know what changes you would like to see in Lexis Advance. Representatives are standing by.

A Second Look: Lexis Advance Revisited (Part 1)

2012-01-06T07:54:00.000-08:00

About seven months ago, I offered some first thoughts on what was then branded Lexis Advance for Law Schools BETA (see Part 1, Part 2, and Part 3). In those postings, I listed quite a few complaints I had about the product. Now that it has been released from Beta (and rebranded as simply Lexis Advance), I will re-examine the product to see whether any of my complaints have been addressed.

First, the Good News

In Part 1 of my original critique, I bemoaned the fact that, at that time, one could not perform a Focus search within a results set, a staple of not only legal research, but instruction as well. This feature has finally been added to Lexis Advance (and is now called Search within results).

In Part 2 of my original critique, I lambasted LexisNexis for claiming to have created a product specifically for law schools although that product contained no administrative materials and little secondary sources that law schools would actually use, but instead offered a grand selection of Briefs, Pleadings and Motions, Jury Instructions, Jury Verdicts and Settlements, Expert Witness Analysis, and Dockets (i.e., materials that few law professors and even fewer law students would need access to). Although I believe that the general gist of that complaint is still valid, I am pleased to report that most of the law school-needed materials have finally been added, and more is on the way. Content currently available through lexis.com but not yet available through Lexis Advance will continue to be added throughout 2012 (and possibly into 2013) until it is all available through Lexis Advance or the world ends, whichever comes first.

Also in Part 2, I denounced LexisNexis's decision to do away with most of the Connectors available in lexis.com. And let me make this clear: Some may claim that, since Lexis Advance was still in Beta, they were just testing out the new set of Connectors, but the fact is that their marketing materials clearly stated that, with Lexis Advance, they had already made the decision to do away with all Connectors except AND, OR, NOT, and W/n (inexplicably renamed NEAR/n), as these were "the new web standard" (see Faculty FAQs Q8). Thankfully, LexisNexis has done an about-face and made most (if not all) of the old lexis.com Connectors (including W/n) available in Lexis Advance. And if anyone actually grew fond of the NEAR/n Connector, it is still available along with a new Connector, ONEAR/n, which is functionally equivalent to my favorite Connector, PRE/n. These changes address what I previously identified as Unnecessary Change #1.

In Unnecessary Change #2, I discussed the change to what would be recognized as "universal characters". To summarize, the exclamation point (!) is the root expander and the asterisk (*) is the placeholder in lexis.com, but in the initial Beta of Lexis Advance, the asterisk was the root expander and the question mark (?) was the placeholder. Now that Lexis Advance is out of Beta, they have made a change. If one clicks on the Search Tips link in Lexis Advance and then clicks on Connectors and scrolls down to the bottom, the screen explains that the exclamation point has been retained as the root expander (just as in lexis.com), but that the question mark is the placeholder (just as in the Beta version of Lexis Advance). Anyone who made it through all three of my original postings might expect me to go nuts on this right now, but I'm actually okay with the current state, provided it remains this way. You see, the developers kept the Lexis Advance Beta universal characters, but also added back in the lexis.com universal characters! So now, the asterisk can be used as either a placeholder in the middle of a term or as a root expander if placed at the end!! In other words, as long as it stays this way, you only need the asterisk; it is truly a "universal" universal character!

In Part 2 of my second look at Lexis Advance, I will examine the status of my other original Lexis Advance-specific complaints and issue a call for action.

Nota Bene numbers for 2011

2011-12-31T17:10:00.000-08:00

Blogging can be a lonely business, especially when the audience is unknown or undetermined. A blogger tries her or his best to write something meaningful (at least to a certain group of people), yet one may never know how the audience reacts. The bloggers at Nota Bene surely have our moments of uncertainty. But judging from the numbers, 2011 has been a very encouraging year. Below are some figures from Blogger’s statistics:

Total pageviews since the beginning, as of 7 p.m., 12/31/2011: 22,099

Total pageviews of 2011, as of 7 p.m., 12/31/2011: 17,633

Total posts in 2011: 103

Total bloggers in 2011: 8

Top ten viewing countries: U.S., Russia, Germany, France, Ukraine, United Kingdom, Canada, Latvia, Netherlands, and Australia.

As the person starting this blog, I first want to thank my fellow bloggers—reference and research librarians in the University of Houston O’Quinn Law Library. They are great colleagues in many ways. The second entity I should give thanks is Blogger.com, which hosts Nota Bene. But the biggest THANK YOU goes to our viewers (many of them our students). Thank you for viewing our blog. We will do our best to bring you useful information in 2012.

This Day in Legal History -- John Selden

2011-12-16T07:36:00.000-08:00

On this day in 1584 noted English jurist and intellectual John Selden was born. In his day-- and for a long time afterward-- Selden was considered by none other than John Milton as “the chief of learned men reputed in this land.” What did John Selden do and why does his name sound vaguely familiar?

Selden, after much education, was called to the bar in 1612. “At bar he enjoyed a high reputation as a giver of opinions, and was called in in cases requiring special learning. But a large legal practice was not the sum of his ambition, nor was contented to be a mere lawyer.” In fact Selden pursued other careers; that of intellectual and as a Member of Parliament. In 1614 he wrote the book Titles of Honor which concerned itself with the history of titles, “. . .the rotes and insignia of appropriate to each, of the ceremonies of investiture, and so on.” He was first elected to the House of Commons in 1621 and served off and on for many years. These were turbulent times; Selden served during the time of the English Civil War and got himself in trouble with the king’s party several times, including his assisting in the drafting of the Petition of Right (which landed him in the Tower) and for writing the book History of Tithes which landed him in trouble with the clergy and for which he was required to recant.

Selden, however, believed most in fairness, and wrote a famous piece that was dedicated to his king. In his Mare Clausum he argued against Grotius famous treatise Mare Liberum. Where Grotius argued for freedom of the seas, Selden argued against it. While Selden is also famous for doing research on Jewish law and custom, he is perhaps best known for his book titled Table Talk. This is an interesting book covering many topics, some in great detail, others in a few sentences.

Now, you may ask, why does the name of this now obscure 17^th Century intellectual sound familiar? Selden's name sounds familiar because the Selden Society is named after him. The Selden Society is a “learned society” devoted to “researching the history of everything which is characteristic of our unique English common law and legal system.” The Selden Society was founded in 1887 by Frederic William Maitland a famous English legal historian. The Selden Society publishes original materials that have often never before been printed. They bring together law reports, judges’ records, legal treatises, and compilations of documents never before brought together. Many major libraries are members, but the bulk of the membership consists of individual lawyers and historians who are interested in English legal history. John Selden may be dead, but his name lives on.

This Day in Legal History -- The Bill of Rights

2011-12-15T07:12:00.000-08:00

On this day in legal history the first ten amendments to the United States Constitution, the Bill of Rights, were ratified and made the law of the land. We should consider ourselves lucky that we have a Bill of Rights because the path which these amendments strode was a rocky one.

While the Constitution originally came with limitations on the new federal government, there were framers who felt the document did not go far enough to protect individuals. Delegate George Mason, who had drafted Virginia’s Declaration of Rights desired that “the plan had been prefaced with a bill of rights. . .[It] would give great quiet to the people.” Those who supported ratification of the new constitution downplayed the need for it as Alexander Hamilton did in the Federalist Papers. They felt that since Congress could only exert enumerated powers there was no need for a bill of rights; a bill of rights would only constrain national powers. A majority of states had their own bills of rights and the feeling was that these would protect individuals. While that was true, the States only protected some rights and not others. For instance Virginia did not protect freedom of speech, assembly, petition or habeas corpus. While all states protected religious liberty, some permitted or provided for establishment of religion. Their coverage was spotty at best.

Those opposed to ratification of the Constitution (the Anti-Federalists) argued that the absence of a bill of rights showed that rights were insecure under the proposed Constitution. Some have commented that the proposal for a bill of rights was merely a smokescreen and that the Anti-Federalists opposed ratification and were seeking amendments to the Constitution on the issues of direct taxes, judicial power, and the commerce power (how little things have changed in over 200 years). A compromise was reached where the Constitution would be ratified and then amended later.

Once the first Congress convened Madison began the task a creating a bill of rights. On September 25, 1789 twelve proposed amendments were submitted to Congress by the States. The Anti-Federalists tried to stop Madison by stalling, adding additional amendments, and “depreciated the importance of the very protections of individual liberty that they had formerly demanded.” Two of the original twelve were voted down and the final ten were ratified on December 16, 1791. Connecticut and Georgia later ratified the Bill of Rights-- in 1939 on the sesquicentennial anniversary of the ratification of the Constitution.

How the Bill of Rights came to be is a fascinating story. As one commentator characterized it, “The party that had first opposed a Bill of Rights inadvertently wound up with the responsibility for its framing and ratification, while the party that had first professed to want it discovered too late that it was not only embarrassing but politically disastrous for ulterior party purposes.” This sounds like a description of the individual mandate portion of the health care reform law. The moral of the story is the more things change the more they stay the same.

Google Scholar Citations

2011-12-09T14:10:00.000-08:00

A recent announcement on the Google Scholar Blog indicates that the company has now made Google Scholar Citations available for all. Google Scholar Citations is a free tool that allows authors to track citations to their articles and compute citation metrics. It provides overall citation information as well as information about citations in the last five years.

Once you provide your name and affiliation, Google Scholar will search for possible articles authored by you. False hits can be deleted easily from the list, while omitted articles can be added as well. In addition, multiple versions of the same article can be merged into one listing. You can also set up an alert to receive an email when a newly published article cites one of your articles. Initially profiles are private, but you can choose to make your information available to the public. Public profiles can be searched, allowing you to locate information about co-authors and other scholars in your area of expertise. To learn more, visit the Google Scholar Citation information page.

Voter ID Laws

2011-12-07T13:16:00.000-08:00

As focus on the 2012 election gains momentum, there is also growing attention on the issue of voter identification laws. These laws require people to show ID, or sometimes photo ID, before they are allowed to vote at the polls. There is a great deal of debate about this issue as some argue that these measures are meant to limit the right to vote for particular groups, while others maintain that these laws are necessary to curb voter fraud. In the last few years, voter ID laws have been enacted or introduced in a growing number of states, including Texas. According to the National Conference of State Legislatures website, in 2011 only three states (Oregon, Vermont, and Wyoming) did not have voter ID laws or consider voter ID legislation.

For information about specific requirements in each state, see the map and chart provided by the National Conference of State Legislatures website. The Brennan Center for Justice has also put together a report detailing the large number of voting law changes in 2011. If you are interested in learning more about voting in Texas, visit the VOTEXAS.org website.

10th Anniversary of the Enron Collapse

2011-12-02T13:30:00.001-08:00

Today marks ten years since the fall of Enron. The law library has a number of sources for those are interested in the collapse itself as well as the investigations and reforms that followed. The following list includes some of those sources:

The Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, which passed Congress in response to Enron is available along with amendments and legislative history documents on the GPO's Federal Digital System (FDsys) and THOMAS.

Texas Bar Legal App

2011-11-29T15:17:00.000-08:00

The Texas Bar Journal is reporting that the Texas State Bar now has its own app for attorneys available for both Android and Apple devices including phones and tablets as well as a web app for those using other devices. The App, created by the Computer & Technology section of the Texas State Bar, provides access to dozens of Texas and Federal statutes, codes, and rules as well as free case law from Google Scholar. There are search and e-mail options available to users who can also access materials without an internet connection, unless using the web app. The app is free for members of the Computer & Technology section and currently requires a section username (bar number) and password for access. The app can be downloaded from the Android market and Itunes, and those using the web app only need to login directly from their mobile devices.

Oh, How I Love Irony: Citing to Wikipedia

2011-11-19T12:14:00.000-08:00

On the Supreme Court of Texas Blog, Don Cruse, inspired by a presentation by Robert Dubose given at the Austin Bar Civil Appellate Lunch on the topic "Can I Cite Wikipedia? The Ethics of Citing Online Information on Appeal", recently wrote a posting entitled "How to Cite to Wikipedia in Appellate Briefs".

One thing I especially liked about this posting was that Mr. Cruse correctly encourages his readers to use the Permalink that Wikipedia provides for each version of an article so the reader can link directly to the exact version of the article the author relied upon rather than the most current version one receives when using the generic article URL, if they're going to cite to Wikipedia. Unfortunately, he doesn't discourage his readers from actually citing to Wikipedia in briefs or discuss when citing to Wikipedia in briefs might be appropriate, nor does he actually explain where Mr. Dubose stands on this issue. But that's not exactly why I'm writing about his post today.

In his posting, Mr. Cruse briefly acknowledges that there is a difference, especially in legal writing, between accuracy and authority, and he comes to the conclusion that "a crowdsourced reference [such as Wikipedia] can be extremely valuable as a place to start deeper research or for information more generally known" (emphasis added). Later, in support of his argument for using the Permalink to a specific version of an article, he takes the Beaumont Court of Appeals to task for using the generic article URL for a Wikipedia article because the court quoted from the article but the pertinent language has since changed.

I would argue that the court should not have cited to Wikipedia at all for a couple of reasons. First, the court was citing to Wikipedia for a description of what MySpace is instead of citing to MySpace itself (the decision was handed down in 2009, a time when MySpace was still a very popular website) or to a more authoritative (or at least stable) print resource (by 2009, I know that MySpace had been written about, and presumably described, in various books and articles). Second, what MySpace is/was is completely irrelevant for the purposes of the decision. Not only does it's description have no impact on the holding, but it has no real relevancy to the factual background as well; the court could have simply described it as a personal website.

[As an aside, one could argue that the court was trying to be as clear as possible for future readers. But this particular opinion is an unpublished opinion, and the court's concern for clarity evidently doesn't extend to all the facts; in an act of self-censorship, the court stated that one of the parties "had a message on his answering machine that stated '[i]f you don't want to leave a message, stick it up your b***.'" (despite the fact that the censored word is a common word that only the most Victorian would deem worthy of censorship, and despite the fact that published court opinions routinely contain expletives of the most not-for-TV variety). In re K.E.L., No. 09-08-00014-CV, slip op. at 6, 2009 Tex. App. LEXIS 1382, at *7, 2008 WL 5671873, at *3 (Tex. App. — Beaumont Feb. 26, 2009), available at http://www.9thcoa.courts.state.tx.us/opinions/PDFOpinion.asp?OpinionId=9877.]

However, Mr. Cruse goes further and attacks the Bluebook because "The emphasis seems to be on what the researcher did (i.e., 'last visited' or 'downloaded from') rather than how the next researcher can quickly get to the right resource." He proudly cites and quotes from his critique of the new edition of the Bluebook because of "how it treats URLs as if they were the names of volumes of books rather than pinpoints to specific pages."

Although I believe there are many reasons why one should not cite to Wikipedia, the lack of quality control, even of a "crowdsourced reference", ranks pretty high for me. I believe that all authors, whether of scholarly works, of appellate briefs, or even of blogs, owe their audiences a duty to make sure, to the best of their abilities, that the information they are disseminating is accurate. If the facts they pass on are accurate, then, ultimately, I really don't care where the authors got their information (although knowing the source can either alleviate or elevate my anxiety about relying on an author's assertion). It should be obvious that going to the original source for verification (or as close to the original source as one can get) should be the best practice.

Which brings us back to Mr. Cruse and his two blog postings. His most recent post on citing to Wikipedia, an inherently unreliable resource, cites with approval his earlier post critical of the new Bluebook. However, when one reads that earlier post, one discovers that his criticism of the Bluebook's "awful" and "baffl[ing]" lack of respect for URLs stems from his reading of someone else's blog post about the new Bluebook. Based on one example of how to cite to podcasts provided by this other post, Mr. Cruse excoriates the new Bluebook for not requiring a specific URL to help the reader find the exact podcast relied on by the hypothetical author. He even laments that he "will open to the internet-related section of the new Bluebook with some apprehension, when it arrives."

Unfortunately, it appears he never did (or, perhaps, he's still waiting for his new Bluebook to arrive). Because if he had, he wouldn't have glowingly cited his Bluebook-bashing post, or, at the least, he would have added a correction to it. The rule that drew his ire, R. 18.7.3, clearly states:

"If the audio recording was accessed online, a parallel citation to its location [i.e., a specific URL] is suggested per rule 18.2.3. If the recording is only available online, it should be cited using the principles of rule 18.2.2 [which generally require a specific URL]. If there is no stable URL available to facilitate access to the source, an explanatory parenthetical should be added explaining how the source should be accessed."

The rule then provides two examples. The second example was the one reprinted in the blog posting that set Mr. Cruse off. The first example, however, clearly demonstrates that a specific URL should be included. If Mr. Cruse had gone to the original source instead of relying on someone else's summary, he would have discovered that his objections were unfounded.

Personally, I find all of this ironic. [My apologies to Mr. Cruse for using him as an example, but I do not mean to disparage him. I am merely trying to draw attention to an all-too-common mistake, one that anyone who cites to Wikipedia is potentially heading toward.]

This Week in Legal History -- Justinian the Great

2011-11-17T11:09:00.000-08:00

This week in legal history was a big one for the Byzantine Emperor Justinian I, aka Justinian the Great. On November 16,534 he published his Codex Justinianus, a landmark legal codification and on November 14, 565 he died after a reign of 38 years.

Justinian I was the emperor of the Byzantine Empire from 527 to 565. While we think of it as the Byzantine Empire, Justinian thought of it as the Roman Empire since Constantinople had been the capital of the Eastern Roman Empire at the time that the Western Roman Empire was over-thrown by the Visigoths in 410. In fact, Justinian was the last emperor who spoke Latin. After Justinian, the empire spoke Greek. Justinian is rightly known as Justinian the Great. He was the emperor who re-conquered the lost provinces in the West-- regaining North Africa and Italy-- that had fallen under the control of Visigoths and Ostrogoths. After rioting destroyed the Hagia Sophia, Justinian rebuilt it bigger than it had been before and making it the center of Orthodox Christianity until the city fell to the Ottoman Turks in 1543. But Justinian is probably most famous as a lawgiver, or rather, a law reviser.

In an effort to bring order to the laws that governed so large an empire, Justinian appointed Tribonian to revise and organize all of Rome’s laws. The result of this effort came to be known as the Corpus Juris Civilis, The Body of Civil Law or the Code of Justinian. The code was composed of three parts; The Codex, The Digest, and the Institutes. The Codex is a compilation of imperial enactments dating back to the time of the emperor Hadrian. The Digest is a compilation of the pronouncements of Roman jurists. Finally, the Institutes is a textbook for law students and is, in essence a hornbook of Roman law. On the first page the Institutes indicates that it is intended for, “the youth desirous of studying the law.” The influence of this work cannot be underestimated. It is the basis of the law in all civil jurisdictions. Justinian’s Code is also the basis of the Roman Catholic Church’s Canon law. The Codex has also influenced many public international law concepts. The Institutes “has always been the best and clearest introduction to Roman law, and time and again it gives relief from the more difficult books that try to explain it.” This week let us celebrate Justinian the Great and his accomplishments in the field of law.

If you are interested in these materials, they can be found translated into English in the O'Quinn Law Library stacks.

The Civil Law, translated by S.P. Scott, KJA195 .C5813 1932

The Digest of Justinian, ed. by Alan Watson (2 volumes) KJA1112.2 1998

The Institutes of Justinian, translated by J.B. Moyle, KJA1088 .E5 2002

A Companion to Justinian’s Institutes, ed. by Ernest Metzger, KJA1089 .C66 1998

This Week in Legal History -- Judges

2011-11-15T09:08:00.000-08:00

On this day in legal history we celebrate the birth of two titans of the bench; judges whose influence not only on the law, but on society at large, are not in doubt. I am of course referring to Associate Supreme Court Justice Felix Frankfurter and Judge Joseph Wapner who presided over The People’s Court. Who could have imagined that two such influential and esteemed men of the law would also share a birthday?

Justice Felix Frankfurter was born in Vienna, Austria on November 15, 1882 and emigrated to the United States in 1894 when he was twelve years old. Frankfurter was an excellent student who attended City College of New York and Harvard Law School where he excelled becoming editor of the Harvard Law Review. Frankfurter worked for Henry Stimson who became Secretary of War under President Taft. When Stimson moved to Washington DC he took Frankfurter with him. Frankfurter was soon invited to join the faculty at Harvard Law School. During World War I he returned to Washington DC as a Judge Advocate General. During this period of his life Frankfurter came to be known as a radical participating in Zionist politics and helping to create the ACLU. After the war he returned to Harvard where he worked on his theory of judicial restraint. Frankfurter acted as an adviser to FDR even while he was teaching at Harvard. Upon the death of Justice Benjamin Cardozo, FDR nominated Frankfurter to the Supreme Court to fill the “Jewish seat.” Frankfurter was confirmed without dissent, and was the first nominee to appear in person before the Senate Judiciary Committee. Frankfurter’s tenure on the high court is remembered by his championing of the theory of judicial restraint. Under this philosophy great deference is given to the elected branches of government in the decisions they make, and such decisions should only be overturned if they “shock the conscience.” Frankfurter’s judicial philosophy, combined with his penchant for lecturing his colleagues on the court, sapped his influence and isolated him from the other justices. Frankfurter, as a Supreme Court justice, has come to be viewed if not as a failure as a justice then certainly as a disappointment.

No one could view Judge Joseph Wapner as a failure or as a disappointment. Joseph Albert Wapner was born on November 15, 1919 in Los Angeles, California. He attended Hollywood High School, where he dated Lana Turner (before she was Lana Turner) and received his undergraduate and law degrees from the University of Southern California. Between getting his B.A. and his J.D. he served in the U.S. Army during WWII where he was awarded a Bronze Star and the Purple Heart. Joseph Wapner served on the Los Angeles Municipal Court and Governor Pat Brown elevated him to the Los Angeles County Superior Court in 1959 where he presided until his retirement in 1979. Soon after retiring from the bench Judge Wapner’s second career began. In 1981 Judge Wapner was appointed to another court, The People’s Court, where he presided over 2,484 episodes and approximately 7,000 cases; far more than Justice Felix Frankfurter. Judge Wapner stepped down from the The People's Court in 1993 returning in 2009 for one episode in celebration of his 90th birthday. Judge Wapner also appeared on the Animal Planet cable channel show Judge Wapner’s Animal Court from 1998 to 2000 and made some cameo appearances as himself in several television shows.

How do these two men of the bench measure up against each other? After retiring in 1962 Frankfurter received the Presidential Medal of Freedom. Wapner has a star on the Hollywood Walk of Fame. Associate justice Felix Frankfurter wrote 247 opinions, 132 concurring opinions, and 251 dissents. Judge Joseph Wapner appeared in almost 2,500 episodes ruling on some 7,000 disputes, and it would appear he was never overruled. Frankfurter reminds us of hot-dogs; Wapner reminds us of the Oscar winning movie Rain Man. Frankfurter became the flag-bearer of the philosophy of judicial restraint after the retirement of Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr. Wapner’s People’s Court spawned numerous imitators such as Judge Judy and Judge Joe Brown; shows in which televised judges solve the problems of real people, shows that continue to be a mainstays of day-time television line-ups demonstrating the legal system to the stay-at-home parent, the unemployed, and those needing an advance on their personal injury settlement.

Both of these men dedicated their lives to the law. There is something correct that these two men who wore black robes and dispensed justice to so many should share a birthday.

New PACER Training Site

2011-11-13T13:27:00.000-08:00

The Federal Judiciary recently announced a new training website for the Public Access to Electronic Court Records (PACER) database. The PACER system provides the public with access to federal court docket information and documents at a cost of $.08 per page (which will increase to $.10 per page in 2012). This new training website will allow users to learn how to search for documents and navigate the system free of charge.

However, not all database content is available in the training site. Currently it includes information and documents from real cases filed in the Western District of New York between 1/1/2007 and 7/1/2007. You are not required to register with PACER to gain access to the site. Instead, a training login and password are provided for all visitors to use. For more information about how to use PACER, see the PACER Service Center User Manual.

OyezToday App

2011-11-09T14:14:00.000-08:00

If you are looking for an easy way to keep up with Supreme Court developments on your mobile device, give the OyezToday App a try. From the Oyez Project at Chicago-Kent College of Law, this app provides information about Supreme Court cases for the current term. It has abstracts of all cases granted review as well as audio of oral arguments with searchable transcripts. Once a case is decided, the app will have a summary and the full-text of the decision along with information about how each of the Justices voted in the case.

The app is available for free on iOS and Android devices. For more information about the app, visit the OyezToday website. You can download the app from the iTunes App Store or the Android Market.

Are Encryption Keys Exempt from Fifth Amendment Protection?

2011-11-03T12:33:00.000-07:00

An article posted on Law Technology News (LTN) by Joshua A. Engel, discusses whether an individual can be required by law enforcement to disclose an encryption key or password to access content on a cellphone or computer. This has obvious Fifth Amendment implications because such disclosure can be viewed as an admission that the individual in question possesses and has access to the documents and information sought by investigators. According to the article, courts have used the "foregone conclusion" doctrine to exempt such encryption keys or passwords from Fifth Amendment protection against self incrimination where the investigators were already aware of the documents. See In re Grand Jury Subpoena to Sebastian Boucher, U.S.D.C., D. Vt. No. 2:06-mj-91 (February 19, 2009). The article points out that the emergence of cloud services where documents can be obtained and shared without downloading files to the device has made the government's ability obtain an encryption key or password more pressing. This is guaranteed to be the subject of much debate over the next several years.

U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC)

2011-10-31T13:56:00.000-07:00

The U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) posts the full text of relevant statutes, regulations, releases, litigation including briefs by the SEC, and EDGAR, a database that provides public access to certain mandated forms submitted to the commission by public companies.

Statutes

The SEC provides information regarding major securities acts

Regulations

Proposed, Final, and Temporary Regulations are posted along with various notices and releases as well as public petitions for rule making. Staff interpretations and similar internal documents designed to provide guidance but are not considered authoritative are also available on the Commission's website.

Documents Related to Litigation

The SEC makes its enforcement actions, briefs, commission opinions, SEC Rules of Practice along with other documents available from its website. The SEC's Administrative Law Judge initial decisions (1960-current) and orders (1996-current) are also available.

EDGAR

The Electronic Data Gathering, Analysis, and Retrieval System (EDGAR) provides access to certain forms filed by public companies as required by the Securities Exchange Act of 1933 and the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, such as the 10-K Form (Annual) and 10-Q Form (Quarterly). A list and descriptions of the different forms are on the SEC's website.

More Information

See the research guide on the SEC's website for more information.

Law Librarians in Lawrence

2011-10-29T13:59:00.000-07:00

The coming week, the Mid-America Association of Law Libraries (MAALL) and the Southwestern Association of Law Libraries (SWALL) will be having a joint meeting in Lawrence, KS. Several staff members of the O'Quinn Law Library will be attending this event and/or helped put it together:

• Mon Yin Lung, our Associate Director, is also the current President of SWALL and, as such, co-chaired the Programs Committee.
• Chris Dykes, one of our Reference/Research Librarians, was a co-coordinator for a two-part program entitled Navigating your Way through Legislative Research-A Six State Survey.
• Emily Lawson, another of our Reference/Research Librarians, also served on the Programs Committee and will also be participating as a moderator and speaker in the two-part, six-state-survey program she co-coordinated with Chris.

Finally, I will be presenting my program, The Bluebook, 19th ed.: Changes Every Legal Researcher Should Know, during which I will be discussing what I believe are the most important or significant changes made to The Bluebook during the change from the 18th to the 19th edition. For those who will be attending and would like to get a headstart on it, or for those who can't attend but would like to know what changes were made (or are just masochistic), here is a list I made of all the changes I could find (not counting the Bluepages, Tables, or Index).

Hope to see you there!

Halloween Advice for Law Students

2011-10-26T11:29:00.000-07:00

1. Dress up as an element from your favorite case; try the carbolic smoke ball from Carlill v. Carbolic Smoke Ball Company or the scales from Palsgraf v. Long Island R. Co. The scales are the only participant in the case that acted rationally.

2. Be Blackacre. This costume is freely adaptable depending upon your taste in color.

3. INS v. Chada. Since this case stands for so many propositions it can literally be anything. When in doubt, cite to Chada.

4. Be the Bluebook. No one will like you but it’s a great costume.

5. Dress as Chief Justice Melville Fuller’s mustache. First lady Ida McKinley did so at the 1899 White House Halloween party and she was a big hit.

6. When trick-or-treaters come to your door remember that they are not interested in the rules regarding the liability of owners/occupiers of land.

7. Instead of handing out candy hand out “fruit of the poisonous tree.” The kids’ parents will love this.

8. Dicta does not make a good treat.

9. Dress up as a judge and tell trick-or-treaters that in order to get candy they have to submit motions in writing.

10. Get two friends to join you and you can trick-or-treat dressed as a three prong test.

11. The Rule Against Perpetuities is still the scariest thing there is.

Will Texas Take One Step Closer to Uniform Citation?

2011-10-25T09:56:00.000-07:00

On the Tex Parte Blog, Angela Morris recently wrote about an impending hearing by the Texas Supreme Court to discuss the benefits and drawbacks of a PACER-like system for Texas courts. From an access-to-information standpoint, this would be a great development! Not only would it make accessing court documents much easier state-wide, but it would require the creation of "a centralized service".

As anyone who has been following the debate over the creation of uniform (or neutral) citation standards should recognize, one of the largest obstacles to uniform citation is the lack in many states of a centralized body responsible for assigning sequential numbers to the opinions of that particular state's many courts. Thus, for example, in Texas, there is currently no body charged with assigning unique sequential opinion numbers to all of the opinions from the various Texas Courts of Appeals. (Of course, Texas could take a leap forward and utilize a neutral format similar to Louisiana's, but c'mon, nobody really wants that.)

Granted, even if the system envisioned by the Texas Supreme Court were to be implemented, it would not, of itself, establish a centralized body charged with assigning sequential numbers to the opinions of the state's courts. However, I believe it would still be a positive first step toward such an institution. Once Texas has a centralized body working with the case documents from all the courts, it is not too much of a stretch to imagine that body's mission expanding to include practices that would be conducive to the establishment of a vendor- and format-neutral citation standard for Texas. That may be a long ways off, but one can dream.

This Week in Legal History -- October 22, 1910.

2011-10-20T10:44:00.000-07:00

During the first half of the 20th century Dr. Hawley Harvey Crippen was one of the most notorious murderers on both sides of the Atlantic, and it was on October 22, 1910 that he was convicted of murdering his wife.

Dr. H.H. Crippen was an American homeopathic physician living in London. He was married to Corrine “Cora” Turner, a frustrated music-hall singer who performed under the stage name “Bella Elmore.” By all accounts theirs was not a happy marriage, and one that gives lie to the expression “opposites attract.” Crippen was quiet and hard working; the very picture of an Edwardian-era nerd. Cora was loud, brash, hard-drinking, and bragged about her many affairs. Put off by his wife, Crippen himself began an affair with his secretary, Ethel Neave.

On January 31, 1910 after a dinner party at the Crippen home, Cora disappeared. Friends began to call for her and Crippen told them that she had moved back to the United States. Cora’s friends continued to ask about her and Crippen then asserted that she had died. The friends then contacted the police. The police came to Crippen’s home, performed a cursory searched, and interviewed Crippen. Although the police had found nothing and Crippen had made a positive impression he panicked, and with his mistress in tow, fled London to the Continent and eventually boarding a ship sailing from Antwerp to Canada. A routine follow-up revealed Crippen’s escape and a trans-Atlantic chase ensued, with the world following closely by virtue of the newly invented wireless radio.

Crippen was caught just before he landed in Canada and he and Ms. Neave were transported back to England for trial. When Crippen’s home was searched again human remains were found (but did not include a head, limbs, bones, or reproductive organs), and it appeared impossible to tell for certain that they were the remains of Cora. The new science of forensics came to the rescue. The noted pathologist Bernard Spilsbury was able to identify the remains as belonging to Cora due to a piece of skin which appeared to be a scar which matched a surgical scar that Cora had had. In addition, large amounts of the toxic compound hyoscine were found in the remains. Crippen had recently purchased a large amount of this substance. After a five day trial, and a jury deliberation of just 27 minutes, Crippen was convicted of Cora’s murder. He was sentenced to death. Ethel Neave was acquitted.

Crippen protested his innocence to the end, and new evidence may support his claim. In 2007 forensic scientists from Michigan State University tested some of the tissue samples originally taken by Spilsbury from the remains found in Crippen’s cellar. The testing revealed that not only did the DNA found in the cellar have nothing in common with the DNA from three of Cora’s still living maternal relatives, but the remains were not even of a female! The forensic experts suggest that Crippen was framed by detectives who were feeling pressure to solve the case. While the DNA evidence is intriguing there are still unanswered questions that must prevent anyone from presenting Crippen with a posthumous pardon. Crippen’s defense asserted that Cora had fled to America with another man; if that was the case how come she never came forward? Given Cora’s personality the trial would have given her the 15 minutes of fame she so desired.

Eric Larson’s book Thunderstruck deals with the Crippen murder and the man-hunt across the ocean that followed. Larson tells a two stories; Crippen’s and the story of Marconi’s invention of the wireless radio and the intersection of the invention and the felon. The murder of Cora Crippen was one of the first murders to be followed so closely by so many people; it was the O.J. Simpson Ford Bronco chase of its time.

Besides the aforementioned Thunderstruck , other notable books on the Crippen murder case include The Mild Murderer: the true story of the Dr. Crippen case by Tom A. Cullen and The Trial of Hawley Harvey Crippen from the Notable British Trials series. The latter reproduces verbatim the testimony given during the trial.

The perfect description of this case is provided in the prefatory note in The Trial of Hawley Harvey Crippen , “If the trial is less interesting from a legal point of view than some others, this defect is atoned for by the extraordinary human and dramatic interest with which the story is packed, and which has placed Dr. Crippen in the front rank, so to speak, of convicted murderers.”

This Day in Legal History--October 17th

2011-10-17T13:01:00.000-07:00

“There is always someone tougher than you are.” –Anonymous

“… in this world nothing can be said to be certain, except death and taxes.” –Benjamin Franklin

There should be no doubt that Al Capone was a tough man. He ordered the death of Bugs Moran and his gang from the comfort of his Florida vacation home, an order that resulted in the infamous “St. Valentine’s Day Massacre” that left 7 men dead. “Scarface” Al was tough, but the Internal Revenue Service was tougher, and on this day in 1931 Al Capone was sentenced to 10 years imprisonment for tax evasion. The story of Al Capone’s reign of terror ending in charges more likely to be brought against a shady small businessman is interesting as tax stories go, and available, with primary documentation, on the IRS web site.

As one can imagine getting a conviction for anything against Al Capone, Public Enemy No. 1, would not be an easy thing. The fact that “Al Capone never had a bank account and only on one occasion could it be found where he ever endorsed a check,” financial evidence was scarce. Getting individuals to testify was also difficult as a result of “fear of personal injury” or loyalty. And finally the agents of the Treasury Dept. had to contend with Capone’s “native Italian secretiveness”. Convicting Al Capone of anything was going to be a challenge.

A key piece of evidence against Al was the testimony of three members of a citizens’ militia that raided one of his gambling joints. In the midst of the citizens’ raid Al shows up to find out what is going on. He is admitted to the premises only after telling the crowd that he is the owner and he is later heard instructing the cashier to secure the money in the cash drawer. With this evidence of his ownership of a gambling establishment the government proceeds to base a case for tax evasion. Al Capone owns a gambling establishment, he has made profits from said establishment, and has failed to pay taxes on these profits. Tax evasion!

Capone was convicted and did time in the federal prison on Alcatraz Island and was paroled in 1939. Suffering from advanced syphilis Capone died in 1947. As I said, this is interesting for a story related to taxation. What makes it more interesting that some of the original reports filed by the investigators of the Intelligence Unit of the Bureau of Internal Revenue are available on the IRS web site. To read these reports go here.

50 State Surveys

2011-10-16T17:09:00.000-07:00

Sometimes legal researchers are called upon to do state-by-state comparisons of the law in particular areas. These 50 state surveys can be daunting and very time consuming, but there are some helpful resources you can look to in order to determine if someone has already compiled the information you need.

A great place to start is with the Subject Compilations of State Laws bibliographies, available in print in the library. The most recent volume is located in the Reference collection at KF240.S795, with the older volumes in the stacks at the same call number. This resource lists citations to where you can find 50 state surveys on hundreds of subjects. Another good print source is the National Survey of State Laws (6th ed.) located in the Reference collection at KF386.N38, which is updated through June 1, 2007. It contains summaries of the laws in each state, with citations, on a variety of topics.

Westlaw and Lexis both contain a large number of 50 states surveys. In Westlaw, consult the 50 State Surveys (SURVEYS) database and in Lexis, look for the LexisNexis 50 State Surveys, Legislation & Regulations database. Be sure to note when the survey was last updated. Since the surveys in Lexis and Westlaw are only available to subscribers, a free source you can turn to is the National Conference of State Legislatures website. This website contains information about laws passed in the states on a number of topics such as health care, immigration, and employment law.

Free Federal Rules Ebooks

2011-10-13T08:37:00.000-07:00

The Cornell Legal Information Institute (LII) and the Center for Computer-Assisted Legal Education (CALI) have partnered to provide access to free ebook copies of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure, and the Federal Rules of Evidence. The ebooks can be downloaded in the .epub format making them compatible with devices such as the iPad and the Nook as well as the .mobi format for Kindle users.

The ebooks have Tables of Contents and Advisory Committee notes after each rule. They also contain internal links to other rules referenced within a particular rule as well as external links to the United States Code available on the LII website. Visit the ebook help page to learn more about how to download these ebooks.

Reforming Tax Liens

2011-10-07T11:36:00.000-07:00

Professor Danshera Cords of Albany Law Schoo l has authored the forthcoming article: Lien of Me: Virtual Debtors Prisons, the Practical Effects of Tax Liens and Proposals for Reform (forthcoming University of Louisville Law Review, Vol. 49, 2011) that discusses the devastating damage done to a person's credit rating and employment prospects by having unpaid tax liens levied by the IRS. According to Professor Cords, such liens do unnecessary damage because they do not improve the chances that the tax amount in question will ever be collected. The author proposes a number of reforms including:

1). Amend the Internal Revenue Code to require a tax lien to be removed from an individual's credit report and treated as if it had never been filed once payment is satisfied.

2) Amend the Fair Credit Reporting Act to require the removal of a tax lien from a taxpayer's credit report after the same period of time that debts from other creditors would have been removed.

3) The decision to issue tax lien notices should take into account whether such notice will increase the chances of collecting the tax debt from the taxpayer.

This article is now available on SSRN.

Eminent Domain: A Handbook of Condemnation Law

2011-10-04T14:54:00.001-07:00

The ABA Section of State and Local Government Law has published Eminent Domain: a Handbook of Condemnation Law (KF5599.E468 2011), which is now on the law library's new titles shelf. All eight chapters are authored by different contributors who focus on a specific area of eminent domain including, among other topics, the principles of "public use" and "public purpose" as well as "just compensation," which is owed to the property owner for the seizure of property. The chapter covering "public use" and public purpose" summarizes the Michigan Supreme Court case, County of Wayne v. Hathcock, and the U.S. Supreme Court case, Kelo v. City of New London, which had opposite results on these matters. Measures available to those who choose to fight the attempted seizure of property and the litigation process involved are covered in Chapters 6 and 7, and this book also discusses actions taken by the government that result in damage such as the flooding of property. A table of cases and a state-by-state survey of public use standards are included in the appendices.

SCOTUS Justice Search Tips for LexisNexis/Westlaw

2011-09-30T08:58:00.001-07:00

With the new term of the Supreme Court of the United States just around the corner, here are some search tips for finding decisions authored by a particular justice.

When using lexis.com:

To find all opinions (of any type) authored by a particular justice, use the WRITTENBY segment in the U.S. Supreme Court Cases, Lawyers' Edition (GENFED;USLED) database: e.g., writtenby(scalia). To find all opinions of a particular type authored by a particular justice, use one of the following narrower segments:

• Use OPINIONBY to find "opinion[s] of the Court" (i.e. majority and plurality opinions) authored by a particular justice;

• Use CONCURBY to find concurring opinions (including "in part" or "in the judgment") authored by a particular justice;

• Use DISSENTBY to find dissenting opinions (including "in part") authored by a particular justice.

NOTE: There can be some overlap between the CONCURBY and DISSENTBY segments. In instances where a justice is concurring in part and dissenting in part, their name will appear in both segments. Also, although this post is about searching for opinions of US Supreme Court Justices, these segments can be used in any other caselaw databases to find opinions authored by a particular judge/justice in their relevant jurisdiction.

When using Westlaw:

With Westlaw, it's not as clean and easy. Westlaw's SCOTUS database, All U.S. Supreme Court Cases (SCT), offers similar fields to lexis.com's segments, but Westlaw's fields are actually broader, resulting in more mis-hits. For example, according to the Scope information for the SCT database, the JU field is supposed to contain the "Name of the judge writing the principal opinion." However, a search of ju(scalia) also retrieves some instances where he merely joined in the opinion of the Court. It also includes instances where he authored opinions dissenting from denials of certiorari, and although I can understand West's view that such opinions are the "principal" opinions, I cannot agree with that assessment and prefer LexisNexis's practice of labeling such opinions as dissents; calling a dissent "the principal opinion" is very ambiguous and can be confusing to new legal researchers.

But the problem goes further than that: Westlaw does not provide an easy way to retrieve only dissenting or concurring opinions authored by a particular justice. They do provide a few options that will help narrow down the results list, but they are not very precise. Here are your options:

• The CON field: This field does contain the names of "the judges who wrote the [concurring] opinions", but it also contains the text of those decisions as well. Accordingly, searching for con(scalia) will retrieve the concurring opinions he authored as well as all concurring opinions that merely mention him.

• The DIS field: This field contains the names of "the judges who wrote the [dissenting] opinions", but it also contains the text of those decisions as well. Accordingly, searching for dis(scalia) will retrieve the dissenting opinions he authored as well as all dissenting opinions that mention him.

• The SY field: This field contains the synopsis of the case, which is "[a] summary of the case prepared by West, a Thomson business, another publisher, or the court." Georgetown Law Library's Supreme Court Research Guide suggests using this field to retrieve dissents and/or concurrences from a particular author. For example, the search sy(scalia +s concur! dissent!) means you're searching the synopsis for any instance where the term "scalia" precedes, in the same sentence, either some form of "concur" or some form of "dissent". And this is a very good strategy since, most of the time, the SY field in the decisions retrieved will contain sentences such as "SCALIA , J., filed a concurring opinion." or "Justice Scalia, with whom Justice Thomas joined, filed a dissenting opinion." Unfortunately, it will also retrieve opinions where the particular justice merely joined in the concurring or dissenting opinion written by someone else, just as the JU field will retrieve "principal" opinions joined, but not authored by, the desired justice. This should be evident in the latter example above, where Justice Thomas joined the dissenting opinion of Justice Scalia's: Such an opinion would be retrieved by the search sy(thomas +s dissent!) even though the searcher is interested only in dissenting opinions authored by Justice Thomas.

The New Generation of Westlaw/LexisNexis

If you want to use WestlawNext rather than Westlaw, the same field searches will retrieve the same results if you limit the Jurisdiction to United States Supreme Court. Unfortunately, WestlawNext does not advertise this functionality, so those law students who have been introduced only to WestlawNext (as opposed to Westlaw) will never know such control exists.

As for Lexis Advance for Law Schools (LALS), although I've been assured segment searching will be retained once the product is fully rolled out, the current Beta version available to law schools does not allow any segment searching, nor do the post-search filters currenty allow the researcher to retrieve only opinions authored by a particular justice. In fact, in its current form, the original search cannot be limited to just US Supreme Court opinions; using the pre-search filters, one can limit the initial search to all federal cases, but that's it. Once the initial results are retrieved, the current post-search filters only allow the researcher to then limit the results to the Supreme Court, but not to a particular justice (although I've been assured that will be added) nor to particular types of opinions (majority, concurrence, dissent, etc.).

Have fun searching, and let's look forward to an interesting SCOTUS term.

Happy Anniversary, Justice Scalia

2011-09-26T06:20:00.000-07:00

Today, September 26, marks the 25th anniversary of Antonin Scalia being sworn in as an Associate Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States. Justice Scalia is the longest-serving Justice currently sitting on the Supreme Court, but he has a way to go to break the record: Justice William O. Douglas sat on the bench from April 17th, 1939 until November 12, 1975, for a total of 36 years, 7 months, and 8 days.

To celebrate (or lament, depending on your point of view) this momentary occasion, here are some resources by and about Justice Scalia:

__________________________________________

A brief biography of Justice Scalia (and all the current Justices) can be found on the Court's website, and the Federal Judicial Center also provides a summary of his professional career. Additional information about Justice Scalia, including snippets of notable media coverage and a commentary on his prescence on the Court directed at lawyers who may be arguing before him in the future, can be found in Volume 2 of the Almanac of the Federal Judiciary.

A PDF of the Senate hearings on Scalia's nomination is available through the GPO's FDSys: http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/GPO-CHRG-SCALIA/pdf/GPO-CHRG-SCALIA.pdf.

__________________________________________

Besides over 800 opinions (including concurrences and dissents) he has authored as a Supreme Court Justice, here are some other notable works by Justice Scalia:

Antonin Scalia et al., A Matter of Interpretation: Federal Courts and the Law (Amy Gutmann ed., 1997) [containing an essay on statutory interpretation by Scalia, followed by responses from four leading constitutional law experts]

Antonin Scalia & Bryan A. Garner, Making Your Case: The Art of Persuading Judges (2008)

Antonin Scalia, "The Bill of Rights: Confirmation of Extant Freedoms or Invitation to Judicial Creation?," in Litigating Rights: Perspectives from Domestic and International Law (Grant Huscroft & Paul Rishworth eds., 2002)

Antonin Scalia, "God's Justice and Ours: The Morality of Judicial Participation in the Death Penalty," in Religion and the Death Penalty: A Call for Reckoning (Erik C. Owens, John D. Carlson, & Eric P. Elshtain eds., 2004)

Antonin Scalia, Sovereign Immunity and Nonstatutory Review of Federal Administrative Action: Some Conclusions from the Public-Lands Cases, 68 Mich. L. Rev. 867 (1970)

Antonin Scalia, The Disease as Cure: "In Order to Get beyond Racism, We Must First Take Account of Race", 1979 Wash. U. L.Q. 147 (1979)

Antonin Scalia, The Two Faces of Federalism, 6 Harv. J. L. & Pub. Pol'y 19 (1982)

Antonin Scalia, The Doctrine of Standing as an Essential Element of the Separation of Powers, 17 Suffolk U. L. Rev. 881 (1983)

Antonin Scalia, The Role of the Judiciary in Deregulation, 55 Antitrust L.J. 191 (1986)

Antonin Scalia, Responsibilities of Regulatory Agencies under Environmental Laws, 24 Hous. L. Rev. 97 (1987)

Antonin Scalia, The Rule of Law as a Law of Rules, 56 U. Chi. L. Rev. 1175 (1989)

Antonin Scalia, Originalism: The Lesser Evil, 57 U. Cinn. L. Rev. 849 (1989)

__________________________________________

Some excellent works about Justice Scalia include:

Richard A. Brisbin, Jr., Justice Antonin Scalia and the Conservative Revival (1997)

Ralph A. Rossum, Antonin Scalia's Jurisprudence: Text and Tradition (2006)

James Brian Staab, The Political Thought of Justice Antonin Scalia: A Hamiltonian on the Supreme Court (2006)

Joseph L Gerken, What Good is Legislative History?: Justice Scalia in the Federal Courts of Appeals (2007)

Joan Biskupic, American Original: The Life and Constitution of Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia (2009)

Guide to Law Online

2011-09-22T13:57:00.000-07:00

The Law Library of Congress's Public Services Division has compiled an annotated guide of Internet links to legal and government information worldwide. Many of the sources provide the full text of materials, and are intended for both specialist and lay users.

The Guide to Law Online is made up of 5 sections:

International and Multinational contains a list of multinational reference sources, webpages for law reviews and journals, treaty information, as well as links to the Global Legal Information Network's database of official legal and government texts, the website for the Organization of American States, and the United Nations web portal.

Nations of the World provides the constitution, information about its executive, judicial and legal branches, legal guides, and general reference sources for each country listed.

U.S. Federal includes materials from the legislative, executive, and judicial branches of the federal government, along with legal research guides and other sources of data. Similar information can also be found at the state level in the Guide's U.S. States and Territories section.

There is also a hyperlinked Index section listing all countries discussed within the Guide.

U.S. Department of Agriculture Statistics

2011-09-21T06:51:00.001-07:00

The U.S. Department of Agriculture's website contains a large amount of information concerning numerous aspects of the country's agricultural and food system.

Its Data & Statistics page covers 4 of the USDA's services:

Economic Research Service (ERS) - supplies indicators, analysis, and data relating to a variety of topics, including: agricultural markets and trade, food safety, natural resources, environment, and conservation, and farm income reports.

Foreign Agricultural Service (FAS) - monitors agricultural production and trade patterns worldwide, and has reports detailing U.S. trade, world production of agricultural products, U.S. export sales, and also provides an online database about production, supply, and distribution of major commodities.

National Agricultural Statistics Service (NASS) - gathers and publishes data about marketing and production, including: the Census of Agriculture (every 5 years), historical data, maps, and crop weather.

World Agricultural Outlook Board (WAOB) - focuses on economic intelligence, and publishes the World Agricultural Supply and Demand Estimates report each month.

Thinking Like A Lawyer

2011-09-14T17:41:00.000-07:00

“[Y]ou teach yourselves the law. I train your minds. You come in here with a skull full of mush, and if you survive, you’ll leave thinking like a lawyer.”
--Professor Kingsfield from the Paper Chase

Although law students certainly learn legal doctrine – the so-called “black-letter law” -- many law professors like to think that they are in the business of teaching legal analysis. As the mythical Professor Kingsfield states, black-letter law is something students teach themselves. Professor Josef Redlich similarly once wrote that “[t]he real purpose of a scientific instruction in law is not to impart the content of the law, not to teach the law, but rather to arouse, to strengthen, to carry to the highest possible pitch of perfection, a specifically legal manner of thinking,” In other words, the purpose of attending law school is not to learn the law, but to learn to “think like a lawyer.”

What exactly does it mean to “think like a lawyer” and why is that important? The answer to the second question should be obvious -- if you are going to be a lawyer, is it not important to think like one? The first question is more difficult to answer.

For some, the answer to what it means to “think like a lawyer” is quite simple. “It means employing logic to construct arguments.” Other commentators, however, believe that “[t]hinking like a lawyer means, to a large extent, thinking rhetorically within a problem-solving context.” And still others take a more thoughtful approach-- “The phrase “to think like a lawyer” encapsulates a way of thinking that is characterized by both the goal pursued and the method used.” The method used, “essentially requires beginning with a factual situation and, through some process, arriving at a conclusion about the rights and duties of the persons or entities involved in the situation.” Learning to “think like a lawyer,” then, is a somewhat nebulous and ill-defined concept. Nevertheless, if knowing how to conduct legal analysis is an essential skill of successful lawyers, then students would be wise to focus not only on learning the relevant legal doctrine, but also on learning how to think like a lawyer.

Unfortunately, “students are often well into their education before they understand the operation of the legal method. Indeed, a law school graduate’s first job is frequently reduced to an apprenticeship in the use of this method.” In order to help students better understand what it means to think like a lawyer, I provide below a short bibliography of sources that discuss legal reasoning. Reading one of these books may help students not only teach themselves the law, but also how to think about the law. No claim is made that this list is exhaustive (or will help students earn better grades in law school), but all these sources provide a good introduction and explanation of legal reasoning. In addition, there are many law review articles on this subject, but they tend to take a more nuanced approach and may confuse as much as they enlighten the novice.

Bibliography:
Steven J. Burton, An Introduction to Law and Legal Reasoning, 2nd ed. (1995)
KF8775 .B87 1995

Wilson Huhn, The Five Types of Legal Argument (2002)
KF380 .H84 2002

Patrick M. McFadden, A Student’s Guide to Legal Analysis: Thinking Like a Lawyer (2001)
KF283 .M396 2001

Elizabeth Mertz, The Language of Law School: Learning to “Think Like a Lawyer (2007)
KF279 .M47 2007

David S. Romantz and Kathleen Elliot Vinson, Legal Analysis: The Fundamental Skill, 2nd ed. (2009)
KF240 .R636 2009

Elias E. Savellos with Richard F. Galvin, Reasoning and the Law: The Elements (2001)
K213 .S28 2001

Frederick Schauer, Thinking Like a Lawyer: A New Introduction to Legal Reasoning (2009)
K212 .S325 2009

Peter T. Wendel, Deconstructing Legal Analysis: A 1L Primer (2009)
KF283 .W46 2009

Kenneth J. Vandevelde, Thinking Like a Lawyer: An Introduction to Legal Reasoning, 2nd (2011)
K212 .V36 2011

The Butler Did It! Rice University and the Law

2011-09-12T11:06:00.000-07:00

Houston’s Rice University is rightfully famous as a small school that provides a superior education for the money. Rice is well known as an engineering school and is now equally famous for its humanities and business programs. For all its fame as an institution of higher learning, Rice first became famous for its connection to the law.

The William Marsh Rice Institute was founded by a bequest from William Marsh Rice, a businessman who came to Houston in 1837 to find his fortune. Rice made his money in cotton, shipping, real estate, and railroads, and by 1860 was the second richest man in Texas. Rice fled Texas during the Civil War, first moving to Matamoros, Mexico and later to Dunellen, New Jersey. In 1891, while living in New Jersey, Rice came up with the idea for the William Marsh Rice Institute for the Advancement of Literature, Science, and Art. The Institute was to be endowed from his estate when he died. In 1896 he was worth approximately $3 million.

On September 23, 1900 William Marsh Rice was found dead by his valet. It was assumed that he had died in his sleep. Or did he? Soon after Rice’s death a bank teller noticed a very large check made out to Rice’s New York lawyer, Albert T. Patrick, on which the lawyer’s name was misspelled. An investigation by New York police uncovered a plot. Patrick, along with Rice’s valet Charles F. Jones conspired to murder Rice and present a forged will leaving Rice’s estate, not to his proposed institute, but to Patrick. Jones, at the direction of Patrick, had administered the chloroform to Rice which killed him. This was a rare case; the butler did it!

Patrick was convicted of the murder based on the forgery and Jones’ testimony. Jones had earlier tried to commit suicide with a knife he claimed had been provided to him by Patrick. In addition, Rice’s Houston attorney, James A. Baker, Sr. had also testified as to Rice’s intentions. This James A. Baker was the grandfather of Secretary of State James A. Baker and a founder of the Houston law firm Baker Botts, LLP. Patrick was later released on appeal due to problems with the forensic evidence.

While this case is fascinating (the butler did it!) Rice University was not yet done with legal controversy. William Marsh Rice did a great thing; he established a university and made it free for both men and women; a co-educational institution being very rare at the time. But Rice was also a man of his time and the charter for Rice University stated that the purpose of the institute was, “the instruction of the white inhabitants of the City of Houston, and State of Texas. . . .” While that may have made sense in the Jim Crow south of 1900 (in fact, Rice had been a slave-holder prior to the Civil War), it would not fly in the 1960’s. Something had to be done. The trustees of William Marsh Rice University filed a suit to amend the trust documents to allow them to begin admitting students of color and charging students tuition. A group of alumni contested these actions. The trustees won and won again on appeal (Coffee v. William Marsh Rice University ,et al., 408 S.W. 2d 269). The court found that “instruction of the white in habitants. . .” wasn’t the primary purpose of the trust and that the trustees had the power to change the trust. The court stated that “The courts will direct or permit a deviation from the terms of the trust where compliance is impossible or illegal, or where owing to circumstances not known to the settlor and not anticipated by him compliance would defeat or substantially impair the accomplishment of the purposes of the trust (408 S.W. 2d 269 at 285). The court further declared that, “it is impossible or impracticable under present conditions to carry out said intent.” (408 S.W. 2d 269 at 283).

Whether it is the Rice Institute, the William Marsh Rice University, or just Rice University, one of Houston’s local institutions has had very noteworthy interactions with the law.

September 11: Ten Years Later

2011-09-11T13:14:00.000-07:00

Today as we pause to remember the events of September 11, 2001, many of you may be wondering where to turn besides the news to read more about that day and the impact it has had on our country. The Library of Congress has several collections about 9/11, including the September 11, 2011 Documentary Project, which “captures the heartfelt reactions, eyewitness accounts, and diverse opinions of Americans and others in the months that followed the terrorist attacks on the World Trade Center, the Pentagon, and United Airlines Flight 93.” The Library of Congress has also partnered with the American Social History Project at the City University of New York Graduate Center and the Center for History and New Media at George Mason University to preserve a digital record of 9/11 through the September 11 Digital Archive.

The Government Printing Office has also released the 9/11 Tenth Anniversary Collection including materials such as the 9/11 Commission Report and Pentagon 9/11, a book detailing the attack on the Pentagon. If you are interested in learning more about the legal response to September 11th, the THOMAS website has compiled a list of legislation from the 107th Congress related to terrorism. In addition, this week the Government Accountability Office released the report: Department of Homeland Security: Progress Made and Work Remaining in Implementing Homeland Security Missions 10 Years after 9/11. This report also contains a listing of related GAO Reports.

In the last ten years, much has been written about the events and impact of September 11th. If you are interested in finding books and government documents available in the library on this topic, you can search the library catalog using subjects such as “September 11 Terrorist Attacks, 2001,” “War on Terrorism,” and “Terrorism – Government Policy – United States.”

Department of Labor Enforcement Database

2011-09-08T08:19:00.000-07:00

If you are interested in labor law and looking for enforcement data, you should check out the Department of Labor’s Enforcement Database. This recently updated resource provides the public with access to enforcement data collected by the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA), the Mine Safety and Health Administration (MSHA), the Employee Benefits Security Administration (EBSA), the Wage and Hour Division (WHD), and the Office of Federal Contract Compliance (OFCCP).

Depending on the agency you select, the database will allow you to search by state or zip code, company name, violation, penalty amount, industry code, or year. However, coverage for each agency varies by year. For instance, OSHA inspection data can be searched back to 1972, but Wage and Hour Division compliance data is included back to 2007. Once you have your results, the data can be exported in Excel or PDF formats. The website has also added a map feature that allows you to view inspection and violation data from OSHA and MSHA.

CBO'S Long-Term Budget Outlook

2011-09-02T08:48:00.000-07:00

The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) reports its projections related to federal spending in the Long-Term Budget Outlook and is available in print in the law library and online through the agency's website. The report in particular discusses the long term outlook on spending and revenue in general and with regard to Health Care, Social Security, and Defense and Non-defense spending. A summary provides a quick overview of the report and numerous table, figures, and a topical index are included. The CBO website also has the full text of the Congressional testimony on long-term budget outlook before the House Budget Committee on June 23, 2011.

The English Legal Process, 13th ed. New York: Oxford University Press, 2011

2011-08-30T07:28:00.000-07:00

Oxford University Press has recently published the 13th edition of The English Legal Process. English Law is a subject area that is difficult for most in the legal profession, but like foreign and international law in general, is becoming more important even for attorneys whose practices focus on U.S. domestic law. This ten chapter book authored by Terence Ingram begins with an overview of the English court system, and covers courts with special jurisdiction and tribunals with administrative powers. An entire chapter is devoted to the legislative process, including interpretation of statutes by judges. Judicial precedent (including a discussion of the House of Lords and the new British Supreme Court), jury trials, appeals and miscarriage of justice, contempt of court, and remedies for public and private proceedings are among other topics that are covered in detail. This item is currently in the law library's stacks (KD7111.I53 2011).

Conflict of Interest on the Supreme Court

2011-08-25T14:38:00.000-07:00

I seldom recommend radio programs in this blog but have to make an exception for this morning's Diane Rehm Show on NPR. The topic--whether Justices Kagan and Thomas should recuse themselves from hearing case(s) on the federal health care reform laws--definitely merits attention from legal scholar and law students. But the discussion/debating skill demonstrated by the guests (Prof. Sherrilyn Ifill of U. of Maryland Law School, Prof. Jeffrey Rosen of George Washington Law School, and Jeffrey Toobin of New Yorker) are remarkable. It is an intellectual treat to listen to this program.

The Source of Law

2011-08-25T12:48:00.000-07:00

Throughout the millenia, philosophers and jurists have pondered the question: From whence cometh Law? I'm not talking about "where did this statute/case/regulation come from?"; I'm talking about the metaphysical concept of "law". Does it emanate from a Supreme Diety (or a pantheon of dieties)? Does it flow from Nature? Does it derive from the caprice of the sovereign or the consent of the governed or the will of the majority? Does it issue from Man's desire for Order, or from his lust for Control? Does it proceed from Reason or Power or Fear or Mercy?

My favorite account comes from the great American wit Ambrose Bierce:

Being instated as an archangel, Satan made himself multifariously objectionable and was finally expelled from Heaven. Halfway in his descent he paused, bent his head in thought a moment and at last went back. "There is one favor that I should like to ask," said he.

"Name it."

"Man, I understand, is about to be created. He will need laws."

"What, wretch! you his appointed adversary, charged from the dawn of eternity with hatred of his soul—you ask for the right to make his laws?"

"Pardon; what I have to ask is that he be permitted to make them himself."

It was so ordered.

Ambrose Bierce, The Devil's Dictionary 139-40 (1911) (definition of "Satan").

Legal Research Skill Refreshers

2011-08-24T20:01:00.000-07:00

Each semester the O'Quinn Law Library provides five sessions of research skill refresher. Presented by our lawyer-librarians, sessions include advance databases search skill, legislative history, administrative law, and several subject specialties. Each session is about forty-five minutes long. Most of them come with handouts. Please click here for information of this semester's offering. Hope to see you there!

American Justice: Now and Then

2011-08-23T12:57:00.000-07:00

Tomorrow (Aug. 24), the University of Houston Law Center will be celebrating the publication of a new book entitled American Justice in the Age of Innocence: Understanding the Causes of Wrongful Convictions and How to Prevent Them. This book, co-edited by one of our faculty, Professor Sandra Guerra Thompson (a leading criminal justice scholar), with two of her top students, Jennifer L. Hopgood and Hillary K. Valderrama, "explores the circumstances surrounding wrongful convictions" and "examines the most common causes behind breakdowns in the legal system."

Interestingly (at least to me), today (Aug. 23) happens to be the 84th anniversary of the executions of Sacco and Vanzetti. Whether one believes they were innocent or guilty, it hardly can be denied that the controversy surrounding the Sacco and Vanzetti case provided the foundation for the modern innocence projects movement. Then Harvard professor, and future Justice of the U.S. Supreme Court, Felix Frankfurter authored a famous article excoriating the trial proceedings, especially the use of eyewitness testimony. Criticism of the reliability of eyewitnesses remains a focal point of exoneration attempts to this day.

Douglas Linder, a professor at the University of Missouri-Kansas City School of Law, has put together an excellent website devoted to the Sacco and Vanzetti case. For those who are tired of Casey Anthony, I strongly encourage you to check out Prof. Linder's website. And then, grab a copy of American Justice in the Age of Innocence.

The 19th Amendment Turns 91

2011-08-18T12:57:00.000-07:00

Today is the 91st anniversary of the ratification of the 19th amendment, granting the right to vote to all U.S. citizens, regardless of sex. The movement for women's suffrage largely originated in 1848 at the Seneca Falls Convention, where the right to vote was described as an "inalienable right." Suffragists employed several different methods to meet their objectives on the federal, state, and local levels, including demonstrating, lobbying elected officials to pass state legislation granting suffrage, giving speeches, and going on hunger strikes.

They also tried to get laws that limited voting to male citizens overturned in court, but that strategy was unsuccessful. In 1878, the Supreme Court unanimously ruled in Minor v. Happersett (21 Wallace 162) that the 14th amendment did not include the right for women to vote as one of its privileges and immunities to citizens. It was also the first year in which an amendment was proposed in Congress that would extend the franchise to women nationwide.

Throughout the late 19th century, the women's rights movement slowly increased its appeal, and the role women played during World War I finally convinced President Wilson to back an amendment to the Constitution in 1918. The 19th amendment was passed in the House of Representatives on May 21, 1919, and the Senate followed suit shortly afterward. Tennessee became the necessary 36th state to reach the three-fourths of states needed to agree, with a very close vote of 50 to 49 in its House of Representatives on August 18th, 1920. The ratification was officially certified 8 days later.

Sources:
Deborah L. Rhode, Nineteenth Amendment, in Encyclopedia of the American Constitution 1808-1809 (Leonard W. Levy & Kenneth L. Karst eds., 2000).

National Archives & Records Administration, Featured Documents: The Constitution and the 19th Amendment.

The Cert Pool - a new Supreme Court tracking website

2011-08-17T06:55:00.001-07:00

Currently in beta mode, this website, created by Don Cruse (who also created DocketDB, which is focused on tracking Texas Supreme Court cases), covers current U.S. Supreme Court activities. It tracks the Court's docket, organizing cases by: the circuit or state in which they originated, cases with Calls for the View of the Solicitor General (CVSG), amicus filers at cert level or overall, and direct appeals from three judge courts. There is also a Quick Link option, which takes you directly to cases that originated in your state, with a link to the corresponding federal circuit.

Within each category, cases are listed at their current stage, including: if there has been a petition filed, if certiorari has been granted, or if a case has been argued or decided. When you click on a particular case name, The Cert Pool provides the docket entries for that case, along with the names of the parties and counsel. If you click on the counsel's name, it will tell you how many times that counsel has appeared before the Court since 2008, and which party he or she represented. There is also the option to track updates to cases of interest via RSS feeds.

Because The Cert Pool is still in beta, there are no links to briefs or case opinions, though there are plans to add them later, along with additional information such as Justice voting patterns or news articles. If you are interested in what the Supreme Court is up to, or if there are particular cases you want to follow, this website is worth checking out.

Scholarly Writing

2011-08-12T11:00:00.000-07:00

Law school is not a barber college (although it may be trending in that direction). A legal education is a graduate education which entails reading and writing about important issues in a scholarly manner. Reading and writing is required, but true mastery comes with reading something, analyzing it, thinking about it, and then putting those thoughts into writing. This process is called the trivium (grammar, logic, and rhetoric) and is the basis of a classical education. Students have several opportunities not only to write, but to engage in the scholarly writing process; to explore an issue at its deepest level and demonstrate their knowledge. This process enables students to sharpen their analytical and writing skills, add a great line on their resume, and learn what it’s like to be a law professor for a short time.

Writing anything for publication is not an easy or simple process. A lot of time and effort goes into the research and writing process, not to mention the thinking about what topic to write on. On top of all this you have to live with a topic for an extended period of time and get to know it intimately. Your topic is like a spouse; they may start out sexy and attractive, but after some amount of time love is what keeps you together.

The above is not intended to discourage anyone from writing something for publication. The feeling of accomplishment that comes with seeing ones name in print (or in pixels depending upon the journal) is well worth the blood, sweat, toil, and tears that research and writing entails. In order to encourage you to embark on this journey I have listed below some useful resources for helping the would-be scholar chose a topic and write.

Sources:

William J. Bridge, Legal Writing After the First Year of Law School, 5 Ohio N.U. L. Rev. 411 (1978).

Christian C. Day, In Search of the Read Footnote: Techniques for Writing Legal Scholarship and Having It Published. 6 Legal Writing 229-54. (2000).

Richard Delgado, How to Write a Law Review Article, 20 U. San Francisco L. Rev. 445 (1986).

Fajans, Elizabeth and Falk, Mary. Scholarly Writing for Law Students: Seminar Papers, Law Review Notes and Law Review Competition Papers. 2nd ed. St. Paul, Minn.: West Group, 2005. KF250 .F35 2005

Elizabeth Fajans and Mary Falk, Comments Worth Making: Supervising Scholarly Writing in Law School, 46 J. Legal Educ. 342 (1996)

Kevin Hopkins, Cultivating Our Emerging Voices: The Road to Scholarship, 20 B.C. Third World L.J. (2000).

Jerold H. Israel, The Seven Habits of a Highly Effective Scholar, 102 Mich. L. Rev. 1701 (2004).

Debra Kaufman, Writing Research Results for Publication, 84 L. Libr. J. 617 (1992).

David B. McGinty, Writing for a Student-Edited U.S. Law Review: A Guide for Non-U.S. and ESL Legal Scholars, 7 N.Y. City L. Rev. 39 (2004).

Heather Meeker, Stalking the Golden Topic: A Guide to Locating and Selecting Topics for Legal Research Papers, 1996 Utah L. Rev. 917 (1996).

Ruthann Robson, Law Students as Legal Scholars: An Essay/Review of Scholarly Writing for Law Students and Academic Legal Writing, 7 N.Y. City L. Rev. 195 (2004).

Pamela Samuelson, Good Legal Writing: Of Orwell and Window Panes. 46 U. Pitt. L. Rev. 149 (1984).

Eugene Volokh, Writing a Student Article, 48 J. Legal Educ. 247 (1998).

Eugene Volokh, Test Suites: A Tool for Improving Student Articles, 52 J. Legal Educ. 440 (2002).

Volokh, Eugene, Academic legal writing: law review articles, student notes, seminar papers, and getting on law review. New York, N.Y. : Foundation Press, 2010. KF250 .V65 2010 (Earlier editions available). The book evolved from the author's article, Writing a Student Article, referenced above.

Three major legal publishers also have contributions to assist prospective student scholars:

BNA, Finding a Topic/Case on Which to Write
This is a PowerPoint presentation from BNA on using their materials to find topics.

LexisNexis, Starting Your Law Review Note
This web-based tutorial takes you through using Search Advisor, preemption checking,
Mealy’s topical newsletters, and updating your research.

Westlaw, Guide to Law Review Research
This 33-page guide provides help with selecting a topic, conducting a preemption search, developing a topic, checking citations, and related subjects all with the use of the Westlaw system.

The Main Library Can Help —Useful databases available through the M.D. Anderson Library

2011-08-08T11:14:00.000-07:00

As followers of dame Law we tend to get locked into a narrow universe of legal research sources -- Lexis, Westlaw, Hein, and perhaps a specialty source that applies to our specific area of expertise or study (e.g., Kluwer Arbitration). You would think that given how encompassing law as a subject has become that our research tools would be equally broad. They aren’t and we rarely think beyond those services we are comfortable with. One of the greatest enjoyments of being a law librarian is introducing an unfamiliar database to a student or faculty member and seeing them light up (like the veritable kid on Christmas morning) when they realize how much easier their lives will be once they begin using this new database. Invariably these databases are those that the library subscribes to through the University’s main library – the M.D. Anderson Library.

The often overlooked, but always helpful, complimentary databases Reader’s Guide and Reader’s Guide Retrospective from H.W. Wilson are guaranteed to make a researcher smile. These databases are based upon the venerable Reader’s Guide to Periodical Literature. Reader’s Guide and Retrospective index articles that have appeared in general interest, special interest, and scholarly publications. Reader’s Guide Full Text has full-text articles published from 1983 to date. The Retrospective has citations to articles published from 1890 to 1982. Think about that for a moment-- these products allow you to find out what popular magazines were writing about since the 19th Century (and back to the Reagan era in full-text!). Together these indexes represent very powerful resources for historical research, and present the opportunity to see how historical issues were treated in both the scholarly and popular press. If you are a student on one of the law school’s journals, you will find these indexes very helpful in the cite-checking process.

A wealth of informational goodness is at your fingertips if you just take the opportunity to check out the databases the M.D. Anderson Library makes available to you.

CourtListener

2011-08-05T14:22:00.000-07:00

If you are looking for a free way to stay on top of recent federal court opinions, then you should take a look at CourtListener. This website, created in 2010 by a graduate student at the University of California, Berkeley School of Information, is an alert tool for opinions issued by the 13 federal circuit courts and the U.S. Supreme Court. The website is updated daily, which means that all of the opinions of the day from these courts will be posted to the site by 5:10pm PST. You can browse by jurisdiction or conduct an advanced search for opinions, and you can download a copy of the original document as provided by the court.

If you choose to register with the website, you can also create custom alerts that will notify you daily, weekly, or monthly when new cases are added that match your search.

Mobile Apps From USA.gov

2011-08-02T10:27:00.000-07:00

The federal government has been developing more and more apps and mobile websites that allow you to access useful government information on mobile devices. For instance, the Internal Revenue Service, the Small Business Administration, and the White House all have apps now. Other government apps provide access to information on a wide range of topics such as travel, consumer safety, and federal jobs. Mobile websites are also available from agencies such as the Environmental Protection Agency, the State Department, and the National Institutes of Health.

All of the apps and mobile websites are free and have been developed for platforms such as iPhone, Android, and Blackberry, although not all apps are available for every platform. The USA.gov Mobile Apps page has a list of the currently available apps and mobile sites. If you have an idea for a useful app, you can send suggestions to the USA.gov staff.

Anatomy of a Trial: A Handbook for Young Lawyers

2011-07-29T13:22:00.000-07:00

The ABA has recently published Anatomy of a Trial: A Handbook for Young Lawyers (KF8915.S24) by Paul Mark Sandler. It examines the major stages of both civil and criminal trials, including the voire dire process, opening statements, witnesses, direct and cross examination, closing statements, and appeals. The author draws on his own experience in analyzing the process and uses excerpts from two of his cases-United States v. Rosen and Mary Jeanne Maffei v. Angela Smedley, M.D. et al, along with hypotheticals and commentary from trial judges. This book is more practice oriented than research-oriented but is very beneficial for those looking for an overview of the trial process. This book is now in the law library's new titles shelf.

The Legal Rights of the Convicted, by Barbara Belbot and Craig Hemmens. El Paso: LFB Scholarly Publishing, LLC, 2010.

2011-07-27T13:03:00.000-07:00

The Legal Rights of the Convicted thoroughly covers the process and major issues pertaining to corrections law. The authors begin with an introduction discussing the prisoners' civil rights movement in the early part of the twentieth century, as well as expanding on the major sources of U.S. primary law and the concepts of due process relevant to those convicted. There is a chapter dedicated to sentencing issues such as the history and impact of sentencing reform as well as the consequences of a conviction or guilty plea. Other topics include probation, parole, use of force, and the applicability of first amendment protections, fourth amendment prohibition of unreasonable searches and seizures, and eighth amendment cruel and unusual punishment to those convicted, particularly those incarcerated. This title is currently in the library's new titles shelf (KF9731.B45 2010).

Parlez-vous Law?

2011-07-26T09:33:00.000-07:00

When you get to law school everything is different; even the pads of paper are different. As Professor Kingsfield famously said in The Paper Chase, “You come in here with a skull full of mush and you leave thinking like a lawyer.” No one ever tells you that you are also going to “speak like a lawyer,” which you will. To many non-lawyers, the law is written and spoken in a different language, archaic and impenetrable, a jargon designed to keep the layman confused and off balance, maybe even susceptible to being swindled. In some respects all of this is true. A great many words uttered and written by lawyers are not of the English language at all. The language that lawyers work in, the language that makes them lawyers and separates the lawyers from the non-lawyers, is a foreign language, and the name of that language is Law French.

Newer law students may now be saying to themselves, “we have to learn law and French? If I wanted to learn a foreign language I would have gone to business school.” Not to worry, there will be no French lessons. A history lesson, however, is worthwhile. To learn the history of law French is to understand why lawyers speak the way they do, and why the profession keeps trying to learn to speak English. The premier source for the history of legal language is David Mellinkoff’s book The Language of the Law (K94 .M45). Mellinkoff takes what on its face sounds like a dry subject and infuses it with both well written wit and extensive research and quotations from original sources. Opening up this book to any page is a treat.

In 1066, William the Conqueror earned his name by crossing the English Channel from France and conquering England. One of the things William brought with him was the French language (although regrettably, he did not bring French cooking). Now the people then living in England obviously already had their own language, which today we call Middle English. The conquerors, however, all spoke French. Although English did not die out -- it was still the language of the lower classes -- the upper classes spoke French. And since it was the upper classes who made primary use of the courts (a result of their owning all of the land), and all the lawyers were from upper class families, law French flourished in the English courts.

This blending of tongues, English and French, had a secondary effect on the legal profession-- it made it more exclusive. The law was a profession of the upper class who knew French. Over time, anyone who wanted to become a lawyer would have to learn French (or the bastardized version spoken in the English courts). Thus, the profession of law became the last refuge of a declining French language, which served to insulate the profession. As Mellinkoff puts it,

What better way of preserving a professional monopoly than by locking up your trade secrets in the safe of an unknown tongue? Celtic lawyers had done it before in the British Isles. Comparatively few knew French in mid-thirteenth century England. It was never the language of the people. And as time passed it would become incomprehensible to any but the initiate. Here indeed was a language for the law. Not that it was deliberately planned that way. Most likely inertia took the place of design, which would explain the absence of any record of a law French conspiracy. And the coincidence of self-interest simply reinforced the normal inclination to leave things as French as they were.” Mellinkoff p. 101

And thus began the incomprehensible language (to the layman) of the law. Complaints against the complexity and opaqueness of legal language are as old as legal language itself. Mellinkoff also points out that complaints against legal language were also based on the fact that the language was French. (p. 111).

Throughout this period French was the lawyer’s language. The study of law in the Inns of Court was in French. Practicality ruled the day in the courts. “The suggestion of the statute (and it was little more than a suggestion) that English be used in pleading had to be weighed by the practitioner against the absence of legal learning in English and the ubiquity of French.” Mellinkoff p. 113.

As is clear from the practice of law today, English eventually won out over French. According to Mellinkoff, the reason for this was the change from written to oral pleadings. This change over gave us, in Mellinkoff’s words, “the English stockpile of the formalized piety and lament that has distinguished the language of the law ever since.” Mellinkoff p.116.

While English ultimately prevailed, the victory was not complete. Many of the everyday legal words we take for granted are French in origin. “The earliest recorded uses in England of the French appeal, demand, heir, and indictment were legal uses. They were a part of the law French of their day. They are now sufficiently common in everyday English to render a law French tag superfluous.” (p. 106). The very French sounding voir dire no longer has a French meaning; it is strictly a legal expression. Some other legal words with French origins include slander, obligation, robbery, and plaintiff. Looking at this list of words, it is surprising how much French the average lawyers still speaks today.

The existence of such words is not the only affect the French language has had on the language of the law. Given the multiplicity of languages used in the English courts of the day (Middle English, French, Latin, and perhaps some Celtic), it is not surprising that words would be joined together into strings of synonyms. This doubling of words may have started out as a form of translation, added clarity, or just emphasized a point, but it evolved over time into a style of speaking and writing current practitioners are still trying to overcome. This word doubling is embodied in such familiar phrases as “new and novel”, “cease and desist”, “give, devise, and bequest”, and “aid and comfort”. While it gives off a strong scent of “law,” the word doubling of often redundant synonyms, is often cumbersome and always confusing, thus the “plain language movement” which in one form or another has been with us for as long as some lawyers spoke French and everyone else spoke English.

Studying law is often akin to learning a foreign language. It is a relief to know that learning the law sometimes really is learning a foreign language, a language that has evolved over time, passing through the pens and mouths of numerous of our attorney (French word origin) predecessors.

Information on the US Federal Debt Limit

2011-07-21T16:05:00.000-07:00

With all this debate and concern about the US federal debt limit ceiling (including the constitutionality of it), I'm sure many of you would like to know more about it. Luckily, if you fall into that group, the Congressional Research Service (CRS) has a couple of reports that you may find interesting.

The most recent report is The Debt Limit: History and Recent Increases; the CRS has published several reports with this title in the past, but the most recent one, dated July 1, 2011, is piping-hot fresh. It explains how federal debt was dealt with before the institution of an overall aggregated debt limit, and details the tumultuous political wranglings over the debt limit that have occurred in the last decade. [Hat tip to the Law Librarian Blog.]

The second CRS report on the debt limit, dated April 27, 2011, is entitled Reaching the Debt Limit: Background and Potential Effects on Government Operations. This report details the "extraordinary measures" the Treasury has taken at particular moments in the past to postpone reaching the debt limit, usually to allow Congress to raise the ceiling. It also examines the possible implications reaching, and not raising, the debt limit would have on various government operations as well as potential economic and financial effects. This is a very sobering report.

Who Pays the Bills?

2011-07-20T13:30:00.000-07:00

What piece of mail (sometimes via email) comes every month and can either make it a good day or a bad day? It’s your bank statement. Did you know the federal government has a bank statement and it’s available every day to view online. This daily bank statement is provided by the Financial Management Service, a bureau located in the Dept. of the Treasury. The job of the Financial Management Service is to “provide central payment services to Federal Program Agencies, to operate the federal government’s collections and deposit systems, to provide government-wide accounting and reporting services and to manage the collection of delinquent debt owed to the government.” This is the department that sends out the checks, makes the deposits, and collects on outstanding debts. At their web site you can see how much money the government has on hand, how much is coming, and how much is going out each day.

Each day’s statement, which is only two pages long, makes fascinating reading. Just looking at the July 18^th, 2011 statement I see that the government brought in $67 million from “Foreign Deposits, Military Sales,” and paid out $40 million for NASA programs. And if you’re worried about Uncle Sam bouncing a check, don’t. They always keep plenty of cushion in the account—just like you.

If you are an accountant, or just interested in reading balance sheets, you will thoroughly enjoy the Daily Treasury Statement.

(hat tip to this Slate.com article: Your Deadbeat Uncle Sam)

The “Trap” of Neutral Citation? A Response to Professor Dippel

2011-07-19T12:55:00.001-07:00

In the Spring 2011 issue of Law Library Journal (Vol. 103, No. 2), an article by Horst Dippel, Professor Emeritus of British and American Studies at the University of Kassel in Germany, caught my eye. The Trap of Medium-Neutral Citation, or Why a Historical-Critical Edition of State Constitutions Is Necessary, 2011 Law Libr. J. 14, 103 Law Libr. J. 219, is actually a very fascinating article that discusses the travails of researching historical state constitutions. However, there are two aspects of this article that bothered me.

First was the misleading title: The Trap of Medium-Neutral Citation. Although I'm sure I would have read it eventually, the ominous title was what impelled me to read the article immediately upon receiving my copy. This title clearly implied that a main thesis (if not the main thesis) of the article was to be some kind of argument against medium-neutral citations, most likely emphasizing citations to state constitutions. Indeed, the abstract provided at the beginning of the article reinforced this implication by promising to "discuss[] problems . . . with citing to state constitutions using medium- or format-neutral citations" (abstract, at p. 219).

Unfortunately, Prof. Dippel spends all of one paragraph summarily rejecting neutral citations for constitutions because such a citation "presupposes that the quoted text is always the same, independent of the particular vendor or medium from which it is taken" (¶ 1, at 219). Later in the article, when he briefly mentions neutral citations again (¶ 15, at 224, ¶ 21, at 225, and ¶ 38, at 231), it becomes clear that he is referring specifically to historical versions of state constitutions compiled by less-than-conscientious publishers, not to current, official texts.

This focus on historical documents leads me to my second criticism of Prof. Dippel's article: His apparent animosity towards neutral citations stems from an incomplete reading of the relevant legal citation standards. Right off the bat (¶ 1, at 219), Prof. Dippel establishes that his criticism of neutral citations derives primarily from Peter W. Martin's Introduction to Basic Legal Citation, as Prof. Martin interprets The Bluebook (19th ed. 2010). Prof. Dippel unfairly derides both of these sources for failing "to be aware of the flaw" in citing to state constitutions simply by "articles, sections, clauses, and subsections" (¶ 1, at 219). Neither source is worthy of such disrespect (at least as far as this issue goes).

To begin with, Prof. Martin's work is, as the title clearly states, an Introduction to Basic Legal Citation. There are three components to this explicitly descriptive title. First, it is an "introduction"; it "is not a substitute for a comprehensive reference" (§ 1-100). Similarly, it is "basic" and "aims at building a basic mastery of 'legal citation' as codified in" more comprehensive citation manuals (§ 1-100). Finally, it deals with "legal" citation. As Prof. Martin explains, "legal citation . . . is a standard language that allows one writer to refer to legal authorities with sufficient precision and generality that others can follow the references" (§ 1-200). In addition, Prof. Martin concedes that his guide "is focused on the forms of citation used in professional practice rather than those used in journal publication" (§ 1-100).

Although it is sometimes necessary for an attorney or a judge to cite to historical versions of constitutional provisions, such writers (as well as most legal scholars) usually only need to cite to that text which currently enjoys the status of full legal authority. Accordingly, I think it entirely reasonable for an introduction to basic legal citation to instruct on the "widely used form of citation" for constitutions, which just happens to be "vendor- and medium-neutral" (Dippel, ¶ 1, at 219 (quoting Martin, § 2-300)).

Despite Prof. Dippel's heightened expectations of Prof. Martin's work, there is still a more disturbing problem with his reading of the standards; namely, that he apparently didn't read the standards in their entirety. This is particularly disconcerting for someone arguing for the necessity of historical-critical editing. If one reads the sections Prof. Dippel references all the way through, both Prof. Martin's guide and The Bluebook make it clear that the neutral citation forms they prescribe are meant for current, official texts.

Professor Martin's section on constitutional citations concludes with the guidance that "[n]o date is required unless the citation is to a provision or version of the constitution no longer in effect" (§ 2-310). Indeed, even in the section from which Prof. Dippel explicitly quotes, Prof. Martin warns that constitutions can be changed (albeit not as easily and, hence, frequently as statutes) and that such change "raises a risk . . . that the text . . . to which a writer refers and the text consulted by a reader . . . may be different. . . . Addressing this possibility calls for both writer and reader to pay serious attention to the date of the compilation relied on by the writer. That information must be delivered in some non-ambiguous fashion" (§ 2-300). Although it is absent from Prof. Martin's guidance regarding constitutions (again, because this introductory work is focused primarily on current versions of legal texts), his instructions for statutes, which he makes clear are analogous, include the following admonition: "If an unofficial commercial codification is relied upon, it is customary to use that product's branded abbreviation . . . and to place the publisher's name, brand, or online source (abbreviated) ahead of the currency information in the parentheses" (§ 2-330).

The Bluebook provides similar guidance. After providing the general instruction on citing to current, official constitutional provisions, Rule 11 then explains what alterations are required for citations to constitutional texts that have been repealed, amended, "totally superseded or are otherwise no longer in effect." Although the Rule 11 instruction to "indicate parenthetically the name of the publisher, editor, or compiler" is explicitly intended for "citing a constitution contained in an electronic database," The Bluebook provides additional guidance that allows one to apply this instruction to print works as well. In its Introduction, The Bluebook provides that "when citing material of a type not explicitly discussed in this book, try to locate an analogous type of authority that is discussed and use that citation form as a model" (p. 1). State constitutional materials published in historical compilations certainly fit the bill "of a type not explicitly discussed in" The Bluebook. Alternatively, Rule 1.6(a)(ii) allows bibliographical information for the relevant compilation to be appended to the end of a citation introduced by the explanatory phrase "reprinted in". By adding the particular compiler and date of compilation to any of the constitutional documents Prof. Dippel discusses, either in a parenthetical or in a "reprinted in" clause, one can easily transform the general neutral citation format to a "vendor-specific" one that should alleviate Prof. Dippel's misgivings.

The topic of neutral citation for all primary legal authority was a hot topic back in the 1990s (see, e.g., Am. Ass'n of Law Libraries, AALL Task Force on Citation Formats Report March 1, 1995, 87 Law Libr. J. 582, ¶ 1 (1995)), and it remains an issue of great concern to many in the legal community today. (See e.g., Ian Gallacher, Cite Unseen: How Neutral Citation and America's Law Schools Can Cure Our Strange Devotion to Bibliographical Orthodoxy and the Constriction of Open and Equal Access to the Law, 70 Alb. L. Rev. 491 (2007); Peter W. Martin, Neutral Citation, Court Web Sites, and Access to Authoritative Case Law, 2007 Law Libr. J. 19, 99 Law Libr. J. 329; Betsy McKenzie, Vendor Neutral Citation Is Getting Some Traction, Out of the Jungle (Mar. 2, 2011, 1:00 PM); UniversalCitation.org (last visited July 19, 2011). I, for one, hold out hope that, if one good thing is to come from the "technologization" of the library and legal research in particular, it is that an universal system of legal citation based on the ideals of the neutral citation movement is in the offing.

Overall, I really enjoyed Prof. Dippel's article. It was very interesting, and I believe he made his case for the necessity of a historical-critical compilation of state constitutional texts. I commend him on his achievement and encourage everyone to read it. However, his piece would have been clearer and more powerful if he had stuck to that topic and stripped away the crutch of an ill-conceived neutral citation bogeyman.

Research Tips: The Department of Energy's Office of Scientific and Technical Information

2011-07-18T12:50:00.000-07:00

The Office of Scientific and Technical Information (OSTI), a Department of Energy program, was initially created in 1947, and its mission is to provide free, universal access to federal research and development information. In addition to information generated within the Department of Energy, its website also contains materials from other federal government agencies and links to international scientific sources.

Several areas of its website pertain to energy-related research. The "Find Key DOE Resources and More" section leads to a wide variety of options, including: the Information Bridge (which currently contains over 279,000 documents and citations to energy research reports), DOE Green Energy (citations, reports, and patents for renewable energy sources), Energy Citations Database (nearly 2.5 million citations to energy research documents), and EnergyFiles (links to other online research resources that the Department considers useful).

Coastal Zone Information Center documents now available on FDSys

2011-07-14T06:10:00.000-07:00

FDSys is providing digital access to documents relating to coastal management that the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) Central Library sent to the Government Printing Office. The collection currently spans from 1951-1999, and contains approximately 5,000 documents in PDF. Items range from reports, inventories and management plans to project catalogs and preservation programs.

Part of NOAA's overall mission is to protect coastal resources from environmental damage and encourage sustainable development, and these documents help to provide further insight into how NOAA accomplishes these goals.

Public Opinion Surveys

2011-07-08T13:07:00.000-07:00

Public opinion surveys are conducted on a wide variety of topics such as the environment, education, health, and international affairs. If your research requires information about public opinion, there are a number of resources you can use to find this type of data.

Many different types of organizations collect polling data. For instance, some news organizations such as ABC News, NPR, and the New York Times conduct polls and place the data on their websites. There are also polling organizations that make their survey results available to the public. The Harris Vault website provides data from The Harris Poll back to 1963 and the Pew Research Center website supplies data from their People & the Press surveys back to 1997.

However, the library also offers access to subscription databases that pull together public opinion datasets from a number of different sources, some of which are discussed above. The first is the iPOLL Databank from the Roper Center for Public Opinion Research. This database contains over 17,000 datasets from the U.S. and other nations back to the 1930s. The library also has access to ProQuest Statistical Insight. While this database offers access to a variety of statistical information, it also contains public opinion survey data from commercial publishers, research organizations, and universities.

Columbia International Affairs Online (CIAO)

2011-07-07T07:48:00.000-07:00

One of the legal databases that can be accesses through the O’Quinn Law Library website is Columbia InternationalAffairs Online (CIAO).

The CIAO website is updated on a monthly basis and offers access to a vast collection of materials in the area of international affairs. These range from working papers from academic institutions around the globe and NGO’s, findings of research projects, conference proceedings, journals, books, and policy briefs to specially created course packs covering subject areas like free trade and NAFTA.

Furthermore, an interactive atlas created by the Economist Intelligence Unit, providing global intelligence as well as analysis, can be accessed. In addition a constantly updated collection of videos on news topics like Japan’s nuclear crisis, the consequences of Bin Laden’s death and the tapings of the highly acclaimed Columbia University World Leaders Forum series are available.

iTunes U and YouTubeEDU

2011-07-06T12:05:00.000-07:00

Many people may not know that two websites often thought of as places to turn for entertainment, iTunes and YouTube, also provide access to educational content. iTunes U allows educational institutions to distribute content such as lectures, language lessons, and tours to students, and the general public, for free. Currently more than 800 universities, including the University of Houston, participate, with about half allowing public access to their content. More information about the University of Houston’s iTunes U website can be found here.

YouTubeEDU is a section of the popular video site that contains educational videos from colleges and universities. You can search for videos by keyword or you can browse videos by educational institutions such as Harvard and Stanford or by subjects such as Law, Health & Medicine, or Business. The University of Houston YouTube site can be accessed here.

Homeland Security Digital Library

2011-06-29T08:29:00.000-07:00

Not often one has to research homeland security issues, but if that is the case, the homeland security digital library is the place to go. Having just recently opened to the public, it contains the nation’s premier collection of documents related to homeland security policy, strategy, and organizational management collected from a wide variety of sources. The library is divided into eight key sections, ranging from national strategy documents to theses and research reports from the Naval Postgraduate School Center for Homeland Defense and Security, including an exhaustive collection of executive orders and key legislation.

Open access to over 47,000 documents is available for anyone interested and access to more than twice the amount of information will be made available upon request and approval.

Famous Legal Quotations

2011-06-24T08:57:00.000-07:00

“The first thing we do, let’s kill all the lawyers”-- Henry VI, part 2

This line is one of the most famous lines in Shakespeare’s canon, and probably the one line of Shakespeare most people know. This expression is certainly one of the most famous lawyer jokes ever; the implication being that by killing all the lawyers society would be improved.

Understanding by whom and when the infamous statement is spoken, however, changes its meaning. The line is spoken by the character Dick the Butcher, an associate of Jack Cade. The real Jack Cade, as well as the character in Shakespeare’s play, led a revolt during the reign of Henry VI. Although Cade initially succeeded in assuming power over London, Cade’s rebellion eventually was defeated by London’s establishment, with Cade and his followers driven out of the city. Dick the Butcher is thus one of the play’s villains, and his statement about killing the lawyers represents one of the rebels’ top ambitions. By putting the line into the mouth of an evil character rebelling against the established order, Shakespeare clearly informs us of his positive view of the role lawyers play in society. The rebels advocate anarchy; lawyers represent the rule of law. Dick the Butcher is voicing the need to kill the very people who maintain civil society through the creation and enforcement of law. Shakespeare knew that by killing all the lawyers society would collapse into the anarchy demonstrated by Cade’s Rebellion. Shakespeare, and perhaps more importantly his patrons, would be against any form of rebellion, since it was they who formed the establishment. Shakespeare thus had no desire to kill all the lawyers; the proof is in his mouthpiece.